OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

South Carolina v. United States

Case Information

Date Filed: February 7, 2012
State: South Carolina
Issues: Voting Rights Act, Voter ID
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Case 1:12-cv-00203)

Issue:

Whether the US Justice Department properly denied preclearance to South Carolina's Voter ID law under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act

Status:

Complaint filed 2/7/12. Answer filed 4/9/12. Trial set to begin 8/27/12. Opinion delaying implementation of Voter ID law until after 2012 election issued 10/10/12. Order Finding South Carolina Entitled to Costs with Certain Items Excluded filed 1/4/13.

District Court Documents

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

When Should a Voter’s “Clerical Error” Invalidate a Ballot?

Edward B. Foley

Not when the state already has enough information to verify the ballot’s validity.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

An Obscure Ohio State Law Could Shake Up the Republican Convention

Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in an ABC News article about the Republican Convention:

“It’s entirely imaginable that these kind of controversies will emerge if Donald Trump goes into Cleveland without 1,237,” said Dan Tokaji, an expert in election law at the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University, referring the number of delegates needed to clinch the nomination. “There’s going to be a furious jockeying for these delegates.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. District Judge Blocks Enforcement of Ohio Statutes

In an opinion released today, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley enjoined the enforcement of various statutes amended by the Ohio General Assembly in 2014. The amendments altered certain requirements for absentee and provisional voting. According to Judge Marbley, the amendments violated the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment. The case is NEOCH v. Husted.

more info & analysis...