OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz



NEOCH v. Husted

Case Information

Date Filed: October 24, 2006
State: Ohio
Issues: Voter ID, Provisional Ballots, Absentee Ballots
Current Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:06-cv-00896-ALM-TPK)


Original Issues: (1) Whether Ohio's voter ID laws are unconstitutional as "confusing, vague, and impossible to apply" in violation of the right to vote; whether the laws are unconstitutional because they apply only to in-person voters and not to absentee voters; whether they are unconstitutional because they may bar voters who do not have required identification from voting on Election Day; whether they are unconstitutional because only some forms of ID must have current address; whether they are unconstitutional as a poll tax. (2) Whether Ohio's provisional-ballot laws are unconstitutionally vague and therefore violate Equal Protection and Due Process.

Subsequent Issue: Whether an April 2010 Consent Decree requiring that provisional ballots improperly voted as a result of poll worker error still be counted is valid under Ohio law.

Current Issue: Whether Ohio SB 205 and 216 unlawfully discriminate against minority voters and unconstitutionally burden the right to vote.


Plaintiffs' and Defendants' trial briefs filed 3/10/16. Trial at District Court held March 2016. Parties' proposed findings of fact filed 4/28/16. Defendants' post-trial brief filed 5/5/16. Plaintiffs' response to defendants' proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law filed 5/5/16. Opinion enjoining enforcement of Ohio statutes filed 6/7/16. 6th Circuit Opinion affirming District Court's attorney fee award (with some exceptions) filed 8/1/16. Opinion reversing District Court on most of plaintiffs' claims filed 9/13/16. Order denying rehearing en banc filed 10/6/16. Emergency Application to Stay Sixth Circuit Mandate filed in U.S. Supreme Court 10/25/16. Response in Opposition filed 10/28/16. Order Denying Emergency Application for Stay filed 10/31/16. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 3/3/17. District Court Opinion and Order Denying Motion to Extend Consent Decree filed 4/28/17. Order Denying Writ of Certiorari filed 6/19/17. District Court order granting joint motion to assign case to magistrate for mediation filed 1/17/18.

Related Case: SEIU v. Husted


Disclosure: EL@M Senior Fellow Daniel Tokaji is one of the attorneys representing amici League of Women Voters of Ohio and Common Cause of Ohio in this case. No EL@M member who participates in any lawsuit covered on the EL@M website is involved in generating the website's information or analysis on that lawsuit.


District Court Documents


Court of Appeals Documents (attorney fees)

Court of Appeals Documents (appeal regarding validity of consent decree)

Court of Appeals Documents (emergency appeal regarding provisional ballots)


Court of Appeals Documents (attorney fees)


Court of Appeals Documents (appeal regarding SB 205 and SB 216)


U.S. Supreme Court documents



Edward B. Foley

Filibusters are not for shutdowns

Edward B. Foley

The minority party must win elections, not derail the government, to prevail on policy.

more commentary...

In the News

Edward B. Foley

New Districts In 2018 Unlikely As SCOTUS Continues To Weigh Wisconsin Gerrymandering Lawsuit

Professor Edward Foley appeared on Wisconsin Public Radio to discuss Gill v. Whitford, a landmark redistricting lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court. 


“Even if they're victorious … I think the 2018 elections will be on the old maps," Foley said. 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Federal Court Finds Unconstitutional Partisan Gerrymandering in North Carolina

A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina released a lengthy opinion Tuesday finding that North Carolina\'s 2016 Congressional Redistricting Plan was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The case is Common Cause v. Rucho.

more info & analysis...