OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Kobach v. EAC

Case Information

Date Filed: August 21, 2013
State: National
Issue: Voter Registration
Courts that Heard this Case: District Court of Kansas (Case 5:13-cv-04095); United States Court of Appeals for Tenth Circuit (Case 14-3062); United States Court of Appeals for Tenth Circuit (Case 14-03072); U.S. Supreme Court (Case 14-1164 )

Issue:

Issue 1:

Did the EAC's failure to modify the State-specific instructions on the Federal Form to include a voter citizenship qualification constitute an agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed under the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 706(1)?

Issue 2:

Did the EAC's failure to modify the Federal Form infringe upon State sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

Issue 3:

Did the EAC's failure to modify the Federal Form constitute an agency action that was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise made in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 706(2)?

Issue 4:

Did the EAC's failure to modify the Federal Form constitute an agency action that was in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, limitation, or short of statutory right under the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 706(2)?

Issue 5:

Did the EAC's failure to modify the Federal Form force the Plaintiff's to choose between two "unconstitutionally coercive" regulations violating the Tenth Amendment and the Seventeenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

Status:

Complaint filed 8/21/13. Motion for preliminary injunction filed 10/23/13. Project Vote's motion to intervene filed 11/13/13. Inter-Tribal Council's motion to intervene filed 11/13/13. Valle Del Sol's motion to intervene filed 11/21/13. League of Women Voters' motion to intervene filed 11/21/13. EAC answer filed 11/25/13. Evidentiary Hearing set for 2/11/14 and 2/12/14. Order that EAC add language requested by Arizona and Kansas to the state-specific instructions on federal mail voter registration form filed 3/19/14. Defendant-Intervenors' Notice of Appeal filed 3/27/14. Defendant-Intervenors' Motion for Stay Pending Appeal filed 3/28/14.  Defendant's Notice of Appeal filed 4/8/14. Order Granting Motion to Consolidate Appeals filed 4/15/14. Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Stay filed 4/18/14. Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel filed 4/18/14. Defendants' Opposition to Expedited Motion to Compel and Support of Motion to Stay filed 4/22/14. Order denying motion to stay case filed 5/7/14. Appellants' Motion for Expedited Consideration and Stay Pending Appeal filed 5/8/14. Order for Temporary Stay filed 5/8/14. Order granting Stay Pending Appeal and Expedited Review filed 5/19/14. Appellants' Brief filed 5/21/14. Appelles' Response Brief filed 6/30/14. Appellants' Reply Brief filed 7/28/14. 10th Circuit opinion issued 11/7/14. State's Petition for Rehearing filed 12/22/14. Order denying Petition for Rehearing filed 12/22/14. Mandate filed 1/6/15. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed 3/21/15. Order Denying Writ of Certiorari filed 6/29/15.

District Court Documents

Court of Appeals Documents (Defendant-Intervenors and EAC Defendants Consolidated)

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

 

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Gerrymandering Is Headed Back to the Supreme Court

Professor Edward Foley was requoted in Mother Jones about a gerrymandering case in Wisconsin on its way to the Supreme Court. Other legal actions on partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and in North Carolina may be bound for the Supreme Court as well.

While previous Supreme Court cases have noted that partisan gerrymanders are “incompatible with democratic principles,” The New York Times originally reported, the court has never officially struck a case down. While it remains unseen how the Supreme Court will rule in the upcoming cases, a 2004 ruling from a previous gerrymandering case could play a pivotal role in how the court stands in the future. 

“The ordered working of our Republic, and of the democratic process, depends on a sense of decorum and restraint in all branches of government, and in the citizenry itself,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in 2004. Kennedy’s statement is “the most important line” in the decision, Foley told The New York Times, adding,  “He’s going to look at what’s going on in North Carolina as the complete absence of that. I think that helps the plaintiffs in any of these cases.”


 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Wisconsin Gerrymandering Case

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a gerrymandering case involving Wisconsin state legislative districts. The court also granted a request by the state to temporarily block the lower court\'s decision until the appeal is resolved. The case is Gill v. Whitford.

more info & analysis...