OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Rucho v. Common Cause

Case Information

Date Filed: August 5, 2016
State: North Carolina
Issue: Redistricting
Current Court: U.S. Supreme Court (Case 17-1295)

Issue:

Whether North Carolina's 2016 Congressional Redistricting Plan violates:

(1) the First Amendment;

(2) the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

(3) the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

(4) Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution because representatives would allegedly not be chosen by "the people of the several states" but in effect by the majority party of the state legislature; and

(5) Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution regarding state legislatures' authority to prescribe the times, places, and manner of holding elections.

Status:

Complaint filed 8/5/16. Time to file answer extended to 10/31/16. Answer filed 3/3/17. Opinion and Order denying motion to dismiss filed 3/3/17. Parties' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed 6/5/17. Defendants' Motion for Stay filed 6/26/17. Responses to Motion for Stay filed 7/17/17. Order Denying Stay filed 8/29/17 with Memorandum Opinion filed 9/8/17. Notice of Bench Trial starting Oct. 16, 2017 filed 9/11/17. Parties' Post-Trial Briefs and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed 11/6/17. Opinion finding unconstitutional gerrymander filed 1/9/18. Emergency Motion to Stay Pending Supreme Court Review filed 1/11/18. Order granting stay filed 1/18/18. Motions to affirm by Common Cause and League of Women Voters filed 4/27/18. Reply filed 5/15/18. Order vacating judgment and remanding to District Court in light of Gill v. Whitford filed 6/25/18.

 

District Court Documents

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

 

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

U.S. Supreme Court upholds Ohio voter purging process

Professor Edward Foley was quoted in The Blade about Ohio’s voter purge law, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

 

“I don’t think there’s any real reason to believe that the drop-off is going to be significant,” Mr. Foley said. “The Ohio law that was upheld in this case never disenfranchised anybody.”

 

 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Supreme Court Upholds Most Texas Districts in Racial Gerrymandering Case

In a 5-4 decision that reversed the ruling of the District Court, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the drawing of most of the disputed Texas districts did not violate the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act. The case is Abbott v. Perez.

more info & analysis...