OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

Ohio Republican Party et al v. Brunner

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: September 26, 2008 / October 17, 2008
State: Ohio
Issues: Absentee Ballots, Early Voting, Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:08-cv-00913); U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (Case 08-4242, 08-4243, 08-4322); U.S. Supreme Court (Case 08A332)

Issue:

Whether Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's directive (2008-63), which gives voters a five-day window (30-35 days before the election) within which they may simultaneously register and receive an absentee ballot, impermissibly conflicts with state statutory election laws.  Plaintiffs are also challenge Advisory 2008-24, in which Secretary Brunner advises county boards of elections that they are not required to permit party observers at polling places during this period of time.  Plaintiffs are also alleging violations of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).

DISCLOSURE

Status:

The district court issued the TRO on 10/10/10.  A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit vacated this TRO on 10/11/08; however, a full panel of the appellate court, in an en banc review, reinstated the district court's TRO on 10/14/08.  The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the TRO in a per curiam decision released on 10/17/08.  The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in the district court on 11/4/08.

District Court Documents

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

Court of Appeals Documents - Second Appeal (08-4322)

Court of Appeals Documents - First Appeal (08-4242, 08-4243)

Related Links

Related Cases

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

Anti-Trumpersí Most Futile Effort Yet to Stop Trump from Being Sworn In

Professor Edward Foley was quoted in Law Newz about efforts to persuade Chief Justice John Roberts to decline conducting Donald Trump’s Oath of Office on Inauguration Day. Even though the U.S. Constitution requires the President to take an oath of office, the the Chief Justice is not required to administer it. It is unlikely that such attempts will prevent Trump from being sworn in, Foley said.

“I think the main point is that the oath doesn’t need to be administered by the Chief Justice,” he said. “After Kennedy’s assassination, a federal district judge in Texas administered the oath to Johnson.”
 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Fourth Circuit Upholds Virginia Voter ID Law

Today, the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the district court upholding Virginia\'s voter ID law. The court disagreed with assertions that the law imposed an undue burden on minority voters or was enacted with racially discriminatory intent. The case is Lee v. Virginia Board of Elections.

more info & analysis...