HTTP 404 Not Found

OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute v. Husted

Case Information

Date Filed: April 6, 2016
State: Ohio
Issues: Voter Eligibility, Voter Supression
Current Court: U.S. Supreme Court (Case 16-980)

Issue:

Whether the removal of eligible voters from Ohio’s voter-registration rolls, as a result of those voters’ decisions not to participate in recent elections, violates the roll-maintenance provisions of the National Voter Registration Act and has caused eligible Ohio citizens to be deprived of the right to vote.

Status:

Complaint  04/06/2016. Answer filed 4/28/16. Amended complaint filed 5/17/16. Defendant's merit brief filed 5/24/16. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and motion for permanent or temporary injunction filed 5/24/16. Order denying Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and permanent or temporary injunction, and entering judgment for defendant filed 6/29/16. Appellants' brief at 6th Circuit filed 7/13/16. Appellee's brief filed 7/20/16. 6th Circuit Opinion Reversing District Court filed 9/23/16. District Court Opinion and Order implementing remedies consistent with Sixth Circuit Opinion filed 10/19/16. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 2/13/17. Respondents' Brief filed 3/31/17. Petitioners' Reply filed 4/17/17. District Court Order Granting Joint Motion for Further Relief filed 4/24/17. Order Granting Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 5/30/17. Petitioner's Merit Brief filed 7/31/17. DOJ amicus brief filed 8/7/17. Additional Amicus Briefs filed 8/7/17. Order Setting Oral Argument for Nov. 8 filed 8/31/17. Respondents' Merit Brief filed 9/18/17. Petitioner's Reply Brief filed 10/16/17. Order removing case from Nov. 8 oral argument calendar filed 10/27/17. Order setting case for oral argument on Jan. 10, 2018 filed 11/17/17. Oral Argument transcript filed 1/10/18. 5-4 Opinion upholding Ohio voter purge procedure filed 6/11/18. OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs Motion for Final Judgment is GRANTED IN PARTAND DENIED IN PART and Defendants Motion for Final Judgment is GRANTED IN PARTAND DENIED IN PART. Final judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendant on all but one issuethe requirements to inform voters who have moved out of state how to continue to be eligible to vote. Signed by Judge George C. Smith. Pending Appeal, Emergency Motion filed 10/15/18.

Disclosure: EL@M Senior Fellow Daniel Tokaji is involved in this case as one of the cooperating attorneys for the ACLU of  Ohio. No EL@M member who participates in any lawsuit covered on the EL@M website is involved in generating the website's information or analysis on that lawsuit.

District Court Documents

  • Order Plaintiffs' Motion Injunction pdf file (filed 10/12/18)
  • 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Documents

     

    U.S. Supreme Court Documents

     

    Commentary

    Steven F. Huefner

    The Perils of Voting by Mail

    Steven F. Huefner

    Anecdotal evidence of fraudulent absentee ballot harvesting in North Carolina in last month's midterm election already demonstrates the need for greater vigilance in how states conduct voting by mail, whether or not North Carolina ultimately must rerun the election for its 9th Congressional District.

    more commentary...

    In the News

    Daniel P. Tokaji

    This is why US election ballots routinely go missing

    Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in USA Today about the prevalence of missing election ballots.

     

    "Most of the time, it just goes unreported because it doesn't affect the result," Tokaji said. 


    more EL@M in the news...

    Info & Analysis

    U.S. District Judge Orders that Individuals Flagged by Georgia Database Can Vote in Midterms

    Ruling on the plaintiffs\' emergency motion, a U.S. District Judge ordered that individuals flagged for potential citizenship issues by a Georgia database can still vote in the midterms. The judge\'s order set forth specific ways these indivduals can vote. The case is Georgia Coalition for the People\'s Agenda v. Kemp.

    more info & analysis...