Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Share

Last Updated: September 10, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Moyer v. Cortes

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: October 17, 2008 / December 24, 2008
State: Pennsylvania
Issues: Voter Registration, Voter Fraud
Courts that Heard this Case: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (Case 497 MD 2008)

Issue:

Whether the Secretary of State of Pennsylvania must require first time registrants to show ID before voting and whether the Secretary must provide access to voter registration information to local officials so that they can ensure the fairness of the election.

Status:

Complaint, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and Motion to Expedite Discovery were filed on 10/17/08. Motion to Expedite Discovery was denied on 10/24/08. Application for special injunction was denied on 10/30/08. Notice of discontinuance entered 12/24/08.

Commonwealth Court Documents

Complaint (filed 10/17/08)
Plaintiff's Motion for Special and Preliminary Injunction (filed 10/17/08)
Emergency Motion for Expedited Discovery (filed 10/17/08)
Petitioner's Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Special, Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (filed 10/17/08)
Defendants' Answer to Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Expedited Discovery (filed 10/23/08)
Answer of Respondent Secretary of the Cmwlth Pedro Cortes to Emergency Application (filed 10/23/08)
Motion to Expedite (filed 10/24/08)
Order Denying Application to Expedite (entered 10/24/08)
Motion to Withdraw Request for Expedition of Hearing (filed 10/27/08)
Order Granting Petitioner's Motion to Withdraw Request for Expedition of Hearing (entered 10/27/08)
Brief of Amicus Curiae Advancement Project (filed 10/28/08)
Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Brief (filed 10/28/08)
Supp. Brief In Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Special, Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (filed 10/28/08)
Answer to Application for Special Injunction (by Cortes)(filed 10/29/08)
Memorandum of Law of Resp Cortes in Opposition to Pet's Motion for Special, Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (filed 10/29/08)
Answer to Application for Special Injunction (by ACORN and Project Vote) (filed 10/29/08)
Defendants' Brief In Opposition to Preliminary Injunction (filed 10/29/08)
- Exhibits
Order Denying Application for Special Injunction (entered 10/30/08)
Transcript Filed (filed 11/3/08)
Exhibit (filed 11/3/08)
The Private Defendants' Preliminary Objections (filed 11/6/08)
Brief in Support of Preliminary Objections (filed 11/6/08)
Application for Stay (filed 11/17/08)
Order Granting Application for Stay - All proceedings in this matter are stayed until 12-19-08. In the event that the matter remains pending as of that date, the parties shall file a joint status report (entered 11/18/08)
Praecipe for Discontinuance (filed 12/19/08)
Notice of Discontinuance (entered 12/24/08)

Related EL@M Stories

State GOP reveals new witness in ACORN suit (10/23/08)

Commentary

A Poster Child for Dysfunctional Districting

Daniel P. Tokaji

Fifty years ago next month, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Baker v. Carr (1962), inaugurating the “reapportionment revolution” which led to the redrawing of legislative districts across the country. This milestone provides the opportunity to reflect not only on what has been accomplished, but also on what still needs to be done.

more commentary...

In the News

This week: Bama voting rights case in DC courtroom on Thursday

Professor Daniel Tokaji, a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz, was quoted by The Birmingham News in an article about a local county's crusade to end 47 years of federal government oversight of its election returns.

Shelby County is hoping a federal appeals court will agree that the county no longer needs the U.S. Justice Department to approve changes in the ways elections are conducted because the area has progressed from its discriminatory past. It is unclear whether the case would be the vehicle with which justices of the U.S. Supreme Court would review the constitutionality of Section 5.

"I am reasonably confident they're going to take up the question of Section 5 constitutionality within the next few years," Tokaji said. "It could be Shelby County, it could be South Carolina, or some other."

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Federal Court Finds Equal Protection Violation

In the Hunter case, involving provisional ballots in a local Ohio election from 2010, the federal district court has ordered that ballots must be counted if they are otherwise eligible if they were miscast because of poll worker error.

more info & analysis...

Major Pending Cases

more litigation...

Election Law @ Moritz | The Ohio State University Michael E. Moritz College of Law | electionlaw@osu.edu

Please note: Election Law @ Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law @ Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law @ Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.

PDF files in this site require Adobe Reader to view (link opens in NEW window). If you have trouble accessing this page or need to request an alternate format, please email the Moritz Law Webmaster.

OSU Navigation Bar