OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

Green v. Doe

Case Information

Date Filed: October 28, 2008
State: Florida
Issue: Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: Leon County Circuit Court (Case 37 2008 CA 003551)

Issue:

Wether the Republican Party of Florida can challenge voter elligiblity based on the fact the mail sent to voters adresses was undeliverable by the post office.

Status:

Complaint filed on 10/30/08.

Court Documents

  • Amended Complaint PDF (filed 10/30/08)
  • NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION DUCES TECUM (filed 10/31/08)
  • SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION DUCES TECUM (filed 10/31/08)
  • PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR EXPEDITED DECLARATORY RELIEF (filed 10/31/08)
  • NOTICE OF HEARING Event: NOTICE OF HEARING Date: 11/03/2008 Time: 11:00 am (filed 10/31/08)
  • AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES C RIMES, JR. (filed 11/3/08)
  • DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS (filed 11/3/08)
  • DECLARATION OF FREDDIE L. MCPHERSON (filed 11/3/08)
  • DEFENDANTS' OBJECTION TO MOTION TO OBTAIN PRIORITY CASE STATUS (filed 11/3/08)
  • NOTICE OF HEARING Event: NOTICE OF HEARING Date: 11/03/2008 Time: 11:00 am (filed 11/3/08)
  • ARTICLE FROM MIAMI HERALD (filed 11/3/08)
  • AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES ROWLEY (filed 11/3/08)
  • COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (filed 11/3/08)
  • DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED DECLARATORY RELIEF AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS (filed 11/3/08)
  • AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES T. GREEN (filed 11/3/08)
  • NOTICE OF FILING AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES T. GREEN (filed 11/3/08)

Related EL@M Stories

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

The Constitution Needed a Judicial Assist

Edward B. Foley

“The majority contends that its counterintuitive reading of ‘the Legislature’ is necessary to advance the ‘animating principle’ of popular sovereignty.” With this sentence in his dissent (at page 14), Chief Justice Roberts gets to the heart of the debate in today’s 5-4 decision in the Arizona redistricting case.

more commentary...

In the News

David  Stebenne

Can Kasich win all 88 Ohio counties?

Professor David Stebenne was quoted in an Ohio Watchdog article about the possibility of Governor John Kasich winning all 88 Ohio counties in his re-election bid.

“It’s really hard to do,” he said. “As popular as the governor is and as weak as his opponent is, I doubt he’ll carry all 88 (counties).”

Stebenne said Ohio has some unusual counties, which tend to be really Democratic or really Republican.

He said a good example was the election of 1956, when President Dwight Eisenhower carried 87 of 88 Ohio counties.

“He lost one of the Appalachian counties — a poor county where the residents tend to vote Democratic no matter what,” Stebenne said. “There was even some humorous discussion in the Oval Office about that one county.”

Glenn and Voinovich were “the two most popular candidates in modern history,” he added, “and they each only did it once. While Kasich is popular, he really doesn’t have the broad appeal that these two did.”

Stebenne said that both Voinovich and Kasich come from communities that tend to be more Democratic in voter registration, but that Kasich’s first race for governor was more divisive than the races for Voinovich.

“Voinovich had electoral success in Cleveland and as governor because he was able to persuade Democrats to vote Republican,” he said. “Glenn had national appeal across party lines.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Fifth Circuit Affirms that Texas Voter ID Law Violates Voting Rights Act

Today, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued its opinion in the Texas voter ID case of Veasey v. Abbott, affirming in part and reversing in part the District Court\'s decision. The Fifth Circuit disagreed that Texas\' voter ID law is a poll tax under the 14th and 24th Amendments. The Court also vacated the District Court\'s judgment that the law was passed with a racially discriminatory purpose, remanding the case for a determination using the proper legal standard and evidence. However, the Court agreed that the law violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act due to its discriminatory effect. The Fifth Circuit remanded the case for the District Court to determine the appropriate remedy.

more info & analysis...