OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

ACORN v. Cox

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: August 14, 2006 / December 24, 2008
State: Georgia
Issue: Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia (Case 1:06-cv-01891-JTC); U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit (Case 07-15688, 08-14419)

Issue:

Whether the Georgia State Board of Elections' new voter-registration rules, which require each completed application to register be (1) separately sealed before being handed to a private voter registration organizer and (2) not be copied, violate the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Status:

District court case was stayed on 7/14/08 pending resolution of discovery-related mandamus action to be filed in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Petition for Mandamus was denied by the Court of Appeals on 9/24/08.

District Court Documents

Court of Appeals Documents (New Case, 08-14419)

Court of Appeals Documents (07-15688)

  • Petition for Writ of Mandamus, Prohibition and Other Appropriate Relief (filed 12/06/07)
  • Defendants-Respondents are directed to file responses to the petition for writ of mandamus w/in 14 days of this order (filed 12/20/07)
  • Response Letter from Judge Camp advising that he elects not to participate or otherwise respond to the petition (filed 12/28/07)
  • Response to Petition for Writ of Mandamus (filed 1/8/08)
  • PETITION GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART (entered 2/27/08)

Related Links

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

White House drops Obama-era discrimination claim against Texas voter ID law

Professor Edward Foley was quoted in The Christian Science Monitor in an article about how the Trump administration dropped a discrimination claim against a Texas voter ID law. Viewed as one of the strictest voting requirements in the country by voting rights advocates, the law required voters to show one of seven valid forms of ID.

A federal appeals court ruled last year that the law disproportionately impacted minorities and those living in poverty. The court required the state to adjust its requirements before the general election. According to court testimony, Hispanic voters were twice as likely to lack proper ID under the law, while black voters were three times as likely.

“Voting litigation is increasing, not decreasing,” Foley said. “The main impression … is that when a law looks like it’s engaging in outright disenfranchisement of a valid voter, even conservative judges have been stopping that. [But] the judiciary is more tolerant with state legislatures adjusting issues of convenience and accessibility, if the adjustment is not outright disenfranchisement.”
 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Three-Judge Panel Finds Voting Rights Act and Constitutional Violations in Creation of Texas House of Representatives Districts

A little over a month after ruling that Texas\' Congressional redistricting plan violated the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Consistution, a three-judge panel similarly ruled (2-1) with regard to the creation of Texas\' state-level House of Representatives districts. The court issued a 171-page order in which it ruled for the state on some claims. The court also made separate findings of fact. The case is Perez v. Abbott.

more info & analysis...