OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

Democratic Party of Georgia v. Perdue

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: May 23, 2008 / October 13, 2008
State: Georgia
Issue: Voter ID
Courts that Heard this Case: Fulton County Superior Court (Case 2008CV151081); Georgia Supreme Court (Case S09A0201)

Issue:

Whether Georgia's voter ID law violates the Georgia Constitution.

Status:

Appellant filed brief on 10/15/08.  Request for oral argument was filed by Appellant on 11/4/08.  Appellee brief filed on 11/24/08. Motion to remand filed 12/3/08.  Motion to Withdraw Appeal filed 12/5/08.  Response to Motion filed 12/5/08.

Georgia Supreme Court Documents

  • Brief of appellant (filed 10/15/08)
  • Appendices (filed 10/15/08)
  • Brief of A.G. PDF (filed 10/20/08)
  • Response brief - appellant (filed 10/24/08)
  • Amended/revised brief (appellant) (filed 11/4/08)
  • Request for oral argument (appellant) (filed 11/4/08)
  • Brief of appellee (filed 11/24/08)
  • Motion to remand (filed 12/3/08)
  • Motion to Withdraw Appeal (filed 12/5/08)
  • Response to motion (filed 12/5/08)

Trial Court Documents

Related EL@M Stories

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

A Special Master for the Cohen Case?

Edward B. Foley

There should be a strong presumption against special treatment just because the president is involved. 

more commentary...

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Columbus City Council Will See Some Reforms, But Not For Another Six Years

Professor Edward Foley was quoted in WOSU about changes to Columbus City Council that will stem from the passage of Issue 3.

 

“In a city where one political party is dominant, it makes sense to think about the citizen's commission to take it out of the hands of the politicians,” Foley said. “Because if you leave it in the hands of the politicians, it’s hard to get balance between the two parties.”


more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Supreme Court Decides Wisconsin and Maryland Gerrymandering Cases on Procedural Grounds

In opinions issued today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two gerrymandering cases on procedural grounds. In an opinion in the Wisconsin case of Gill v. Whitford, the Court found that the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the legislature\'s redistricting plan. In an opinion in the Maryland case of Benisek v. Lamone, the Court determined that the District Court was within its discretion in denying preliminary relief to the plaintiffs challenging the legislature\'s redistricting plan.

more info & analysis...