Last Updated: May 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM
NAACP New York State Conference v. New York State Board of Elections
Case Information
Date Filed: June 28, 2010
State: New York
Issues: Voting Rights Act, Voting Technology
Current Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Case 1:10-cv-02950)
Issue:
Whether New York's overvote practice and procedure results or will result in the denial of New York citizen's right to vote on account of race or color, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Status:
Amended Complaint filed 9/2/10. Answers by all Defendants filed on 10/1/10. Motion to Compel filed 11/17/10. Parties' Stipulation and Joint Motion for Confidentiality filed 8/4/11.
District Court Documents
- Complaint
(filed 6/28/10) - Order Scheduling Initial Conference for November 3 (entered 8/6/10)
- Plaintiff Working Families Party Notice of Dismissal of all claims (filed 8/26/10)
- Amended Complaint
(filed 9/2/10)
- Exhibit A
- Exhibit A
- First Answer to Amended Complaint (filed 10/1/10)
- Answer to Amended Complaint (filed 10/1/10)
- Motion to Compel (filed 11/17/10)
- Parties' Stipulation and Joint Motion for Confidentiality (filed 8/4/11)
- Letter Detailing Resolution in Principle of Lawsuit (filed 12/5/11)
- Letter Regarding Possible Settlement Agreement (filed 2/08/12)
- Stipulation of Settlement (filed 2/10/12)
- Motion to Dismiss (filed 2/22/12)
- Letter Opposing Motion to Dismiss (filed 2/29/12)
- Letter Requesting Dismissal to City Plaintiffs (filed 3/01/12)
- Plaintiffs' Letter Updating Court on Request to Dismiss Without Prejudice (filed 5/11/12)
Commentary
Provisional Ballots, Consent Decrees, and the Balance Between the Federal and State Governments
Owen Wolfe
A recent mandamus action filed by the Ohio Senate President and House Speaker Pro Tempore to require the Ohio Secretary of State to rescind directives issued in response to a consent decree issued in a federal case dealing with counting provisional ballots raises questions about the mechanics of state election law, the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the relationship between federal and state courts, the law of consent decrees, and more. I have attempted in this article to grapple with these issues in a fair and unbiased manner. Given the complexity of this problem, however, these matters are open to a variety of interpretations and this is just one approach. I hope, however, that this article can provide a useful starting point for a discussion about the future of provisional voting in Ohio and in the nation at large.
This paper is a first look by a student member of the Election Law @ Moritz team and reflects one possible perspective on the issue. Stay tuned, as more analysis from the team will follow as the litigation develops. Owen Wolfe is affiliated with the Ohio Democratic Party and the Obama ’12 campaign, but is not in any way associated with any litigation team working on this case. EL@M has posted the document because we believe it has public value and adds to the discourse on this topic.
more commentary...