OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

Texas v. Holder

Case Information

Date Filed: January 24, 2012
State: Texas
Issues: Voting Rights Act, Voter ID
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Case 1:12-cv-00128); United States Supreme Court (Case 12-1028)

Issue:

Whether Texas' voter ID law should be granted preclearance under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Status:

Complaint Filed 1/24/12. Answer filed 4/9/12. Trial commenced 7/10/12. Opinion Denying Texas' Request for a Declaratory Judgment on Count One issued 8/30/12. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment filed 10/1/12. Order entering final judgment on claim one filed 12/17/12. Notice of Appeal to Supreme Court filed 12/19/12. Lawyer's Committee Motion to Affirm filed 5/9/13. DOJ's Motion to Affirm filed 5/9/13. Rodriguez Intervenor's Motion to Affirm filed 5/9/13. Judgment Vacated and Remanded in light of Shelby County v. Holder filed 6/27/13. Case dismissed on 8/27/13. Order denying Kennie-Intervenros' Motion for Attorney's Fees filed 8/11/14.

Supreme Court Documents

District 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...