OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

 

Perez v. Abbott

Case Information

Date Filed: May 9, 2011
State: Texas
Issues: Redistricting, Vote Dillution
Current Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas (Case 5:11-cv-00360)

Issue:

Whether Texas' redistricting plan violates the Constitution because it does not make a good faith effort to maintain population equality and treats inmates as residents of the counties in which they are incarcerated.

Status:

Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Debbie Allen et al filed 10/14/15. Order denying preliminary injunction filed 11/16/15. Order for supplemental briefing in light of Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission filed 4/20/16. Non-U.S. Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Entry of Judgment filed 12/30/16. Order denying motion for entry of judgment filed 1/5/17. Opinion finding some Congressional districts unlawfully drawn filed 3/10/17. Findings of Fact filed 3/10/17. Order finding intentional discrimination in drawing of Texas state House of Representatives districts, but ruling for state on other claims, filed 4/20/17. Findings of Fact in support of order filed 4/20/17. Order Denying Motion to Certify Record for Interlocutory Appeal filed 5/1/17.

See also Davis v. Perry and Texas v. United States

 

District Court Documents

Supreme Court Documents

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

The Electoral Fix We Really Need

Edward B. Foley

The Electoral College winner should be the majority choice in each state that counts towards that Electoral College victory.

more commentary...

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Gerrymandering Is Headed Back to the Supreme Court

Professor Edward Foley was requoted in Mother Jones about a gerrymandering case in Wisconsin on its way to the Supreme Court. Other legal actions on partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and in North Carolina may be bound for the Supreme Court as well.

While previous Supreme Court cases have noted that partisan gerrymanders are “incompatible with democratic principles,” The New York Times originally reported, the court has never officially struck a case down. While it remains unseen how the Supreme Court will rule in the upcoming cases, a 2004 ruling from a previous gerrymandering case could play a pivotal role in how the court stands in the future. 

“The ordered working of our Republic, and of the democratic process, depends on a sense of decorum and restraint in all branches of government, and in the citizenry itself,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in 2004. Kennedy’s statement is “the most important line” in the decision, Foley told The New York Times, adding,  “He’s going to look at what’s going on in North Carolina as the complete absence of that. I think that helps the plaintiffs in any of these cases.”


 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Wisconsin Gerrymandering Case

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a gerrymandering case involving Wisconsin state legislative districts. The court also granted a request by the state to temporarily block the lower court\'s decision until the appeal is resolved. The case is Gill v. Whitford.

more info & analysis...