Last Updated: September 10, 2010 at 1:39 PM
Moore v. Brunner
Case Information
Date Filed: March 7, 2008
State: Ohio
Issue: Ballot Access
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case 2:08-cv-00224)
Issue:
Whether the Secretary of State's refusal to give the Libertarian Party of Ohio access to the November 2008 general election ballot deprives "plaintiffs of speech, voting and associational rights secured by the First and Fourteenth amendments to the Constitution of the United States."
Status:
Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed on 3/7/08. Answer filed on 5/6/08. Motion for PI granted on 6/2/08. Case consolodated with Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Brunner on 8/05/08. Secong Motion for PI granted (allowing Plaintiffs on the November ballot) on 8/21/08.
Case Summary and Consolidation
Moore v. Brunner (2:08-cv-00819) (Socialist Party USA), Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Brunner (2:08-cv-00555) and McKinney v. Brunner (2:08-cv-00819) (Green Party of the United States) involve minor political party challenges to the Ohio Secretary of State's Directive 2007-09. This Directive established procedures for the placement of minor party candidates on the state election ballot.
On 7/25/08, the Secretary of State filed a motion to consolidate Moore with Libertarian Party, due to the similarity of the issues in the case and for the purposes of judicial economy and legal consistency. The cases were ordered to be consolidated by the Court on 8/5/08. On 8/21/08, the Court granted plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and ordered that the Socialist Party Candidate be placed on the general election ballot in November. On 8/29/08, the Secretary of State filed a motion to consolidate Libertarian Party and McKinney. This motion was granted on 9/2/08.
The documents listed below include the case consolidation orders and the Court's 8/21/08 order granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. For earlier documents, please check the individual case pages linked above.
District Court Documents
- Complaint
(filed 3/7/08) - MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/7/08)
- Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/7/08)
- AFFIDAVIT re MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/10/08)
- AFFIDAVIT re MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/20/08)
- Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/25/08)
- REPLY to Response to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 3/28/08)
- ANSWER to Complaint (filed 5/6/08)
- ORDER granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (entered 6/2/08)
- ANSWER to Complaint (filed 7/16/08)
- AMENDED COMPLAINT (filed 7/21/08)
- MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint (filed 7/21/08)
- Memorandum in Support for MOTION for Leave to File Amend Complaint (filed 7/21/08)
- Second MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (filed 7/21/08)
- Memorandum in Support of Second MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (filed 7/21/08)
- ORDER re MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint (entered 7/21/08)
- MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Defendant Jennifer Brunner (filed 7/25/08)
- ORDER granting Motion for Leave to File (entered 7/25/08)
- ORDER granting Motion to Consolidate (entered 8/5/08)
- ANSWER to Amended Complaint (filed 8/8/08)
- Memorandum Contra Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 8/14/08)
- Reply to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 8/15/08)
- OPINION AND ORDER granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (entered 8/21/08)
- ORDER granting Motion to Consolidate
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...