OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Obama for America v. Husted

Case Information

Date Filed: July 17, 2012
State: Ohio
Issue: Early Voting
Courts that Heard this Case: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:12cv00636); United States 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (Case 12-4055); United States Supreme Court (Case 12A338)

Issue:

Whether Ohio's current election law, which restricts early voting in the three days prior to an election on certain voters, violates 42 USCA 1983 and/or the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Status:

Complaint filed 7/17/12. Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 7/17/12. Motion to Intervene Granted 8/6/12. Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction held 8/15/12. Opinion and Order Granting Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed 8/31/12. Notice of Appeal of Preliminary Injunction filed 9/4/12. Motion to Enforce Court's Order filed 9/5/12. Hearing on Motion set for 9/13/12. Hearing set for 9/13/12 vacated. Appellants' brief filed 9/10/12. Appellees' brief filed 9/17/12. Reply Brief filed 9/21/12. Opinion affirming district court filed 10/5/12. Application for stay filed in Supreme Court 10/9/12. Reply Brief filed 10/13/12. Stay denied 10/16/12. Answer filed 12/3/12. Status Conference scheduled held 3/18/14. Dispositive motions due 5/1/14. Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment filed 5/1/14. Defendants' Response to Motion for Summary Judgment filed 5/9/14. Opinion and Order Granting Permanent Injunctive Relief to Plaintiffs filed 6/11/14.

District Court Documents

Court of Appeals Documents

Supreme Court Documents

 

 

Commentary

Daniel P. Tokaji

Why the Supreme Court Shouldn’t Intervene in Ohio

Daniel P. Tokaji

Briefing is now in the U.S. Supreme Court on Ohio’s emergency motion to stay the district court injunction restoring the rules regarding same day registration and early voting that existed before legislation enacted earlier this year (SB 238). In a previous post, I explained why the district court and Sixth Circuit panel’s rulings were faithful applications of legal precedent requiring close attention to the context in which restrictions on voting are enacted. This post explains why it would be unwise and disruptive for the Supreme Court to change the rules now – now literally on the eve of an election -- responding to comments that my colleague Ned Foley posted yesterday.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

Ohio treasurer receives OK to host town halls

Professor Daniel Tokaji was quoted in an article from the Associated Press about an attorney general opinion that allows the Ohio treasurer to conduct telephone town halls using public money. The opinion will likely have broad ramifications for the upcoming elections, Tokaji said.

“As a practical matter, while that legal advice is certainly right, very serious concerns can arise about whether these are really intended to inform Ohio constituents about the operations of his office or if they’re campaign events,” he said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Ohio Files Emergency Application for Stay with SCOTUS in Early Voting Case

Today, the state of Ohio filed an emergency application in the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision issued yesterday. That decision affirmed the District Court in blocking an Ohio law reducing the number of days for early voting. The case is NAACP v. Husted.

more info & analysis...