A global infectious pandemic triggered changes in election procedures. It also triggered litigation over election procedures. Some of the cases filed in federal courts required emergency action by the court, and the case-management challenges posed by these cases are described in the sixty-five case studies posted here.

This page is part of the Federal Judicial Center’s special topics website on election litigation, which includes several hundred additional case studies of emergency election litigation in federal courts. The site also includes FJC publications on certain election law statutes and a bibliography of election law scholarship.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) also triggered cases that may have been time-sensitive but not quite emergencies, and many of these cases are listed in the following external resources:

• The Ohio University Mortiz College of Law’s election-law website (moritzlaw.osu.edu/election-law).
• The election-law blog (electionlawblog.org) of University of California at Irvine School of Law's professor Rick Hasen.
• The Stanford and MIT Healthy Elections Project's tracking of election litigation related to Covid-19 (healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/cases).
• Tracking by Mortiz and SCOTUSblog of major cases, some of which may come before the Supreme Court (scotusblog.com/election-litigation).

 
CASE STUDIES

Complaints Against Widespread Voter-Registration Challenges Based on Possibly Inaccurate Change-of-Address Records
Majority Forward v. Ben Hill County Board of Elections (Leslie A. Gardner, M.D. Ga. 1:20-cv-266) and Fair Fight v. True the Vote (Steve C. Jones, N.D. Ga. 2:20-cv-302)
Two federal complaints filed in December 2020, less than two weeks before a senatorial runoff election in Georgia, alleged that an organization was improperly challenging voter registrations based on unreliable change-of-address records. One week after the complaints were filed, a district judge in the Middle District of Georgia curtailed one county’s canceling voter registrations based on the change-of-address records alone. On the following day, a district judge in the Northern District of Georgia declined to impose immediate relief on the organization, but the case remained pending through 2023.
Subject: Nullifying registrations. Topics: Registration challenges; National Voter Registration Act; recusal; provisional ballots; Covid-19; case assignment.
Update: Fair Fight Inc. v. True the Vote, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2024 WL 24524 (N.D. Ga. 2024) (opinion filed at N.D. Ga. No. 2:20-cv-302, D.E. 335) (granting judgment to the defendants following a bench trial), appeal pending, No. 24-10372 (11th Cir. docketed Feb. 2, 2024); Fee Award, Fair Fight Inc. v. True the Vote, No. 2:20-cv-302 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 22, 2024), D.E. 348 ($15,000 discovery sanction awarded to plaintiffs).

An Unsuccessful Attempt to Disqualify Runoff-Election Voters Who Voted in Other States in the Previous General Election
Georgia Republican Party v. Raffensperger (Lisa Godbey Wood, S.D. Ga. 2:20-cv-135)
After early voting had started in a January 5, 2021, senatorial runoff election, a federal complaint challenged the validity of votes by persons who voted in other states in the general election the previous November. The district judge denied the plaintiffs immediate relief, because, among other things, it could not be determined whether voters who were in other states the previous November voted in those states’ senatorial elections.
Subject: Nullifying registrations. Topics: Registration challenges; Covid-19; early voting.

Unsuccessful Challenges to Procedures for Accepting Absentee Ballots in Georgia’s 2021 Senatorial Runoff Election
Twelfth Congressional District Republican Committee v. Raffensperger (J. Randal Hall, S.D. Ga. 1:20-cv-180) and Georgia Republican Party v. Raffensperger (Eleanor L. Ross, N.D. Ga. 1:20-cv-5018)
Federal judges in both the Southern District of Georgia and the Northern District of Georgia declined immediate relief from Georgia’s procedures for accepting absentee ballots in a 2021 runoff senatorial election.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; signature matching; laches; intervention; Covid-19.

An Attorney’s Unsuccessful Challenges to Georgia’s 2020 General-Election Procedures
Wood v. Raffensperger (Steven D. Grimberg, 1:20-cv-4651) and Pearson v. Kemp (1:20-cv-4809) and Wood v. Raffensperger (1:20-cv-5155) (Timothy C. Batten, Sr.) (N.D. Ga.)
Ten days after the 2020 general election, a voter alleged that a settlement agreement reached in another case the previous March would result in too few invalidations of absentee ballots. The district judge determined that the plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the other parties’ settlement agreement, the action had been brought too late for equitable relief, and the claims had no merit. The court of appeals agreed that the plaintiff lacked standing. Three weeks and a day after the general election, the voter in the earlier case acted as counsel for plaintiffs in a case challenging how absentee ballots and voting machines were used in the election. Relief was denied because the claims belonged in state court, the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring them, and they brought them too late for equitable relief. In a third action, the plaintiff in the first case and attorney in the second case brought a pro se challenge to Georgia’s election procedures for a pending runoff election, but both the district judge and the court of appeals determined that the plaintiff did not have standing to bring his claims.
Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Enjoining certification; absentee ballots; voting technology; signature matching; laches; interlocutory appeal; intervention; matters for state courts; Electoral College; Covid-19; pro se party.

No Injunction Against Certification of Pennsylvania’s 2020 Presidential Election Results
Donald J. Trump for President v. Boockvar (4:20-cv-2078) and Pirkle v. Wolf (4:20-cv-2088) (Matthew W. Brann, M.D. Pa.)
Ten days after the 2020 general election, a voter alleged that a Six days after the 2020 presidential election, the apparently defeated incumbent sought an injunction against certification of Pennsylvania’s votes, citing alleged mismanagement of the election. The district judge heard oral arguments eight days later, after substantial changes in the plaintiffs’ representation. The judge dismissed the case, and the court of appeals affirmed his denial of permission for another amended complaint.
Subject: Voting irregularities. Topics: Enjoining certification; election errors; intervention; news media; equal protection; absentee ballots; Covid-19; case assignment; attorney discipline.

Mediated Agreement on Ballot-Counting Observers
Donald J. Trump for President v. Philadelphia County Board of Elections (Paul S. Diamond, E.D. Pa. 2:20-cv-5533)
Two days after a general election, a district judge mediated resolution to a dispute over ballot-counting observers.
Subject: Voting irregularities. Topics: Matters for state courts; equal protection; Covid-19; 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

No Standing to Challenge Drive-Through Voting
Hotze v. Hollins (Andrew S. Hanen, S.D. Tex. 4:20-cv-3709)
A district judge held that challengers to drive-through voting in a Texas county during the 2020 election did not have standing to challenge the policy in federal court.
Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Poll locations; early voting; intervention; Covid-19.

Suit to Enjoin Election Officials to Keep Counting Absentee Ballots After the Polls Closed Dismissed Because That Was What They Were Going to Do
Wince v. Thurston (Brian S. Miller, E.D. Ark. 4:20-cv-1274 and 4:20-cv-1278)
A complaint removed to federal court sought an injunction requiring election officials to keep counting absentee ballots if the counting would not be finished when the polls closed. An identical removed action was consolidated with the first. During the injunction hearing, state election officials confirmed that all ballots re-turned on time would be counted, so the district judge dismissed the actions.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; case assignment; removal.

No Relief from a State Supreme Court’s Extension of the Deadline for Receipt of Cast Ballots Because the Action Was Brought Too Close to the Election
Bognet v. Boockvar (Kim R. Gibson, W.D. Pa. 3:20-cv-215)
A federal complaint challenged a decision by a state supreme court regarding a deadline accommodation for mailed ballots at a time of degraded mail service and a global infectious pandemic. The district judge decided that the case had merit, but immediate relief could not be granted only days before the election. The court of appeals affirmed her decision, and the Supreme Court ultimately ordered the case dismissed as moot.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; enjoining certification; laches; matters for state courts; Covid-19; intervention; interlocutory appeal; case assignment.

Prohibited Use of “Reelection” for a Previous Office Holder Who Is Not the Incumbent
Make Liberty Win v. Cegavske (Robert C. Jones, D. Nev. 3:20-cv-592)
Election statutes forbade campaign materials from referring to the election of a previous office holder who was not the incumbent as reelection. The district judge agreed that application of the statutes to a specific campaign was unconstitutional but did not agree that the statutes were facially unconstitutional.
Subject: Campaign activities. Topics: Campaign materials; door-to-door canvassing; Covid-19.

Enjoining Signature Matching Not Provided by State Law
Shernoff v. Andino (Richard Mark Gergel, D.S.C. 2:20-cv-3654)
An emergency action seeking an injunction against disqualification of absentee ballots if the ballot signatures did not match signatures in other records without an opportunity to resolve mismatches turned out to be unnecessary because the district court provided the requested relief in another pending case.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Signature matching; absentee ballots; Covid-19; intervention.

Poll Watchers and Substitute Ballots
Parnell v. Allegheny County Board of Elections (J. Nicholas Ranjan, W.D. Pa. 2:20-cv-1570)
A federal complaint alleged that poll watchers were wrongfully excluded from election locations established to accommodate the Covid-19 infectious pandemic and the issuing of corrected ballots to mail-in voters created the possibility of invalid votes. The district judge denied relief on the poll watchers, and the parties consented to relief on the substitute ballots.
Subject: Voting irregularities. Topics: Early voting; election errors; absentee ballots; intervention; ballot segregation; Covid-19; poll locations; class action.

No Early Voting Site for the Pascua Yaqui Tribe
Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. Rodriguez (James A. Soto, D. Ariz. 4:20-cv-432)
A suit to establish an early-voting location on an Indian reservation was unsuccessful. On the one hand, the suit was brought too close to the election. On the other hand, the plaintiff tribe did not show a sufficient barrier to voting for tribal members on the reservation.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; poll locations; laches; Covid-19.

Filing a Complaint Results in Settled Relief Providing a Voting Location on an Indian Reservation
Blackfeet Nation v. Stapleton (Dana L. Christensen, D. Mont. 4:20-cv-95).
On the Friday night before a Columbus Day weekend, an American Indian tribe filed a federal complaint alleging that it was improper for a county not to provide a voting location on its reservation. The case was assigned to a judge on Tuesday, who set the case for hearing about a week later, but the case settled on Wednesday.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Poll locations; early voting; absentee ballots; Covid-19.

No Remedy for the Malfunction of a Voter-Registration Website Because the State Provided a Small Remedy
Namphy v. DeSantis (Mark E. Walker, N.D. Fla. 4:20-cv-485)
A voter-registration website malfunctioned on the last day of registration. A district judge determined that the secretary of state’s remedy of extending the registration deadline by a few hours was inadequate, but not so inadequate as to require the court’s intervention.
Subject: Registration procedures. Topics: Registration procedures; Covid-19.

Suit to Extend the Voter-Registration Deadline in South Carolina Because of Covid-19 Was Too Late
South Carolina Progressive Network Education Fund v. Andino (Mary Geiger Lewis, D.S.C. 3:20-cv-3503)
Two days before South Carolina’s voter-registration deadline, a voter-registration organization filed a federal complaint seeking an extension of the deadline to accommodate the social distancing made necessary by the global infectious Covid-19 pandemic. One week later, the district judge denied the organization immediate relief, because the suit had been brought too short a time be-fore the election.
Subject: Registration procedures. Topics: Registration procedures; Covid-19; laches; intervention.

Number of Absentee-Ballot Drop-Off Locations Per County in Texas
Texas LULAC v. Abbott (1:20-cv-1006), Straty v. Abbott (1:20-cv-1015), and Texas State Conference of NAACP Branches v. Abbott (1:20-cv-1024) (Robert Pitman, W.D. Tex.)
Because of the global infectious Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, Texas’s governor expanded the time period when voters could drop off absentee ballots. A subsequent order limited the number of drop-off locations to one per county. A district judge issued a preliminary injunction against the second order, but the court of appeals viewed it as part of the first order and therefore part of an expansion of voting opportunities.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; early voting; Covid-19; poll locations.

Extending the Voter-Registration Deadline in Arizona Because of a Pandemic
Mi Familia Vota v. Hobbs (Steven P. Logan, D. Ariz. 2:20-cv-1903)
Because of social distancing made necessary by the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, a district court extended the voter-registration deadline. The court of appeals stayed the injunction, but it allowed a grace period of two days before the stay went into effect.
Subject: Registration procedures. Topics: Registration procedures; Covid-19; interlocutory appeal; intervention.

Denied Complaint for Electronic Overseas Voting During a Global Pandemic
Harley v. New York (Brian M. Cogan, E.D.N.Y. 1:20-cv-4664)
An action against election officials in seven states sought electronic voting for overseas voters during the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic. The district judge denied the plaintiffs immediate relief, and the plaintiffs dismissed their case.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA); absentee ballots; class action.

No Federal Injunction Against Extension of Absentee-Ballot Receipt Deadline in North Carolina
Moore v. Circosta (4:20-cv-182 and 5:20-cv-507) (James C. Dever III) and Wise v. North Carolina State Board of Elections (Richard E. Myers II and James C. Dever III, 5:20-cv-505) (E.D.N.C.) and Moore v. Circosta (1:20-cv-911) and Wise v. North Carolina State Board of Elections (1:20-cv-912) (William L. Osteen, Jr., M.D.N.C.)
Two federal actions filed in the Eastern District of North Carolina challenged modifications to election rules that accommodated a state-court settlement and the dangers of a global infectious Covid-19 pandemic. A district judge granted a temporary re-straining order and transferred the cases to the Middle District where related litigation was pending. The Middle District judge denied the plaintiffs additional relief, and the Eastern District order expired. The court of appeals and the Supreme Court declined the plaintiffs injunctive relief.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; equal protection; matters for state courts; case assignment; intervention.

Unsuccessfully Challenging Private Grants to Local Election Authorities
Wisconsin Voters Alliance v. City of Racine (William C. Griesbach, E.D. Wis. 1:20-cv-1487), Pennsylvania Voters Alliance v. Centre County (Matthew W. Brann, M.D. Pa. 4:20-cv-1761), Texas Voters Alliance v. Dallas County (Amos L. Mazzant, E.D. Tex. 4:20-cv-775), and Minnesota Voters Alliance v. City of Minneapolis (Michael J. Davis, D. Minn. 0:20-cv-2049)
Courts in the Eastern District of Wisconsin, the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and the District of Minnesota held that the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge private grants to election authorities, because the complaints alleged only policy grievances.
Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Voting technology; equal protection; Covid-19; interlocutory appeal; Help America Vote Act (HAVA); National Voter Registration Act; laches.

Whether Absentee Ballots in Minnesota Mailed by Election Day but Received Later Should be Counted
Carson v. Simon (Nancy E. Brasel, D. Minn. 0:20-cv-2030)
To accommodate increased voting by mail and poorer than normal mail service because of a global infectious pandemic, a consent decree in state court allowed for the counting of ballots received up to a week after election day if postmarked by election day. A federal complaint filed seven weeks later challenged the state-court consent decree. The district judge found that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the case. The court of appeals, five days before election day, disagreed and moreover decided that the plaintiffs were entitled to relief.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; interlocutory appeal; intervention; matters for state courts.

Different Rules for Excuse-Based Absentee Voting and Pandemic-Related Mail Voting
Organization for Black Struggle v. Ashcroft (Brian C. Wimes, W.D. Mo. 2:20-cv-4184)
A district judge determined that it was not proper to require voters who were voting by mail because of social distancing made necessary by an infectious pandemic to mail in their ballots while allowing voters voting absentee because of another excuse to hand-deliver their ballots. The judge did not enjoin rejection of mailed-in ballots with errors even without notice and opportunities to cure the errors. The court of appeals stayed the district judge’s injunction, finding reasonable a decision not to expand opportunities for hand-delivering ballots before election day during a pandemic.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; absentee ballots; equal protection; Covid-19; interlocutory appeal; class action.

Enjoining Misleading Postal Information About Absentee Ballots in Colorado
Colorado v. DeJoy (William J. Martinez, D. Colo. 1:20-cv-2768)
A federal district judge enjoined misleading mailings by the postal service about voting by mail in Colorado during a global infectious pandemic.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; early voting.

Unsuccessful Vote-Dilution Challenge to Automatic Mailing of Absentee Ballots in Vermont
Martel v. Condos (Geoffrey W. Crawford, D. Vt. 5:20-cv-131)
A district judge dismissed a federal complaint alleging that mailing absentee ballots to all registered voters created an unconstitutional risk of vote dilution arising from ballots cast by ineligible voters. The judge found the concern to be a general grievance that did not afford the five plaintiffs standing to pursue the claims.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19.

No Constitutional Right to Distribute Absentee-Ballot Applications
Lichtenstein v. Hargett (Eli Richardson and Aleta A. Trauger, M.D. Tenn. 3:20-cv-736)
A time-sensitive federal complaint challenged Tennessee’s proscription on the distribution of absentee-ballot applications by persons other than election officials, noting the importance of absentee voting during a global infectious pandemic. The district court denied immediate relief.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; case assignment; signature matching.

Whether Counties Could Establish More Than One Absentee Ballot Drop Box
A. Philip Randolph Institute of Ohio v. LaRose (Dan Aaron Polster, N.D. Ohio 1:20-cv-1908)
Because of social distancing made necessary by a global infectious pandemic, absentee voting was expected to be high. Because of the postal service’s recent reputation for poor service, many voters wanted to hand-deliver their absentee ballots. Ohio’s secretary of state allowed county election officials to establish one drop box per county, regardless of each county’s geographic or population size. A federal district judge issued an injunction allowing county election officials to set up more drop boxes, but the court of ap-peals stayed the injunction.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; absentee ballots; Covid-19; equal protection; matters for state courts; interlocutory appeal; intervention.

Relaxing Rules on Absentee and Early Voting for Senior Citizens in Puerto Rico During an Infectious Pandemic
Ocasio v. Comisión Estatal de Elecciones (Pedro A. Delgado-Hernández, D.P.R. 3:20-cv-1432)
During the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, two senior voters sought a court order relaxing absentee and early-voting eligibility for senior voters generally. The district judge granted them first a preliminary injunction and then a permanent injunction.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; Covid-19; attorney fees.

Enjoining Truncated Data Collection for the 2020 Census
National Urban League v. Ross (Lucy H. Koh, N.D. Cal. 5:20-cv-5799)
An August 2020 federal complaint filed in the Northern District of California challenged a recent decision to cut short data collection for the 2020 census. A temporary restraining order issued eighteen days later enjoined the truncated data-collection schedule. An-other nineteen days later, the district court issued a preliminary injunction, but nineteen days after that, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction. Following an amended complaint and a January 2021 change in administration, the case was resolved by settlement.
Subject: District lines. Topics: Malapportionment; Covid-19; case assignment.

Allegations of Politically Motivated Degradations of Postal Services
Jones v. United States Postal Service (Victor Marrero, S.D.N.Y. 1:20-cv-6516); National Urban League v. DeJoy (George L. Russell III, D. Md. 1:20-cv-2391); Washington v. Trump (Stanley A. Bastian, E.D. Wash. 1:20-cv-3127); Pennsylvania v. DeJoy (Gerald Austin McHugh, E.D. Pa. 2:20-cv-4096); and Richardson v. Trump (1:20-cv-2262), NAACP v. United States Postal Service (1:20-cv-2295), New York v. Trump (1:20-cv-2340), and Vote Forward v. DeJoy (1:20-cv-2405) (Emmet G. Sullivan, D.D.C.)
Lawsuits filed in five districts alleged that operation changes by the postal service during a global infectious pandemic would interfere with alternatives to risky in-person voting. Four district judges issued preliminary injunctions. The lawsuits were largely resolved following the inauguration of a new presidential administration.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; early voting; Covid-19; case assignment; enforcing orders; class action.
Update: Final Judgment, New York v. Biden, No. 1:20-cv-2340 (D.D.C. Feb. 2, 2024), D.E. 129, appeal pending, No. 24-5047 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 7, 2024).

Challenging Absentee-Ballot Procedures in Detroit During an Infectious Pandemic
Reed-Pratt v. Winfrey (Robert H. Cleland, E.D. Mich. 3:20-cv-12129) and Davis v. Benson (1:20-cv-915) and Johnson v. Benson (1:20-cv-948) (Paul L. Maloney, W.D. Mich.)
During the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, federal actions in Michigan challenged mailing out unsolicited absentee-ballot applications and counting absentee ballots received after election day. Recognizing the complexity of applying state law on the matters during the pandemic, district judges in each of Michigan’s two districts stayed federal claims pending a related action in state court. The federal judges denied the plaintiffs immediate relief.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; matters for state courts; intervention; enforcing orders; primary election.

2020 Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in West Virginia
Wilson v. Justice (Thomas E. Johnston, 2:20-cv-526) and West v. Warner (Irene C. Berger, 2:20-cv-570) (S.D. W. Va.)
Southern District of West Virginia district judges denied 2020 independent candidates relief from West Virginia’s ballot-petition signature requirements. Independent candidates for President and governor argued that the requirements were too onerous, especially during a global infectious pandemic.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; laches; interlocutory appeal; case assignment.

A Recount Ordered Because of Evidence That Write-In Votes Were Not Counted
Curtis v. Oliver (James O. Browning, D.N.M. 1:20-cv-748)
A write-in Libertarian Party primary-election candidate for New Mexico’s court of appeals was only a few votes short of the number needed to advance to the general election. But there were indications of counting errors related to extensive absentee voting because of the social distancing made necessary by a global infectious pandemic. There was sufficient evidence of an undercount in one county for the district judge to order a recount. After the re-count, the candidate qualified for the general election.
Subject: Recounts. Topics: Election errors; primary election; voting technology; recounts; absentee ballots; early voting; matters for state courts; Covid-19; attorney fees.

A Consent Decree Waiving the Witness Requirement for Voting by Mail in Rhode Island During an Infectious Pandemic
Common Cause Rhode Island v. Gorbea (Mary S. McElroy, D.R.I. 1:20-cv-318)
For the June 2020 presidential primary election in Rhode Island, the governor suspended the state’s requirement that mail-in ballots be witnessed by a notary or by two other witnesses. A district judge approved a consent decree applying the witness-requirement suspension to elections in Rhode Island in September and November. The court of appeals and the Supreme Court denied a major political party’s motion to stay the consent decree.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; intervention; interlocutory appeal; laches; primary election.

Modifying the Postmark Requirement for Mailed Ballots in New York
Gallagher v. New York State Board of Elections (Analisa Torres, S.D.N.Y. 1:20-cv-5504)
New York’s allowance for voting by mail during the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic of 2020 had a postmark requirement, but prepaid mail was not always postmarked, so a district judge ordered that ballots received by the day after the election would be counted without a postmark and ballots received by the following day would be counted unless they had a postmark after election day.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; intervention; primary election; class action.

Getting a New Party on California’s Ballot During a Pandemic
Kishore v. Newsom (Dolly M. Gee, C.D. Cal. 2:20-cv-5859)
A complaint challenged the signature requirements to get a new party on the ballot during an infectious pandemic. Because gathering signatures was not the only way to get on the ballot, the district court denied the party relief. Voters could register as members of the new party, and registrations could be recruited by email or social media.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; laches; interlocutory appeal.

Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Oregon During a Pandemic
People Not Politicians Oregon v. Clarno (Michael J. McShane, D. Or. 6:20-cv-1053)
A district judge granted relief to proponents of an initiative with respect to the number of ballot-petition signatures required and the deadline for submission. But the Supreme Court stayed the injunction. The court of appeals determined that the stay made resolution of the case in time for the election impractical.
Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Getting on the ballot; ballot measure; Covid-19; laches.

Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Maine During the Covid-19 Pandemic
Bond v. Dunlap (1:20-cv-216) and Jorgensen v. Dunlap (1:20-cv-272) (Nancy Torresen, D. Me.)
Because of social distancing made necessary by the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, prospective candidates in Maine’s 2020 general election sought court-ordered modifications to the ballot-petition signature requirements. One candidate’s effort was unsuccessful, and the other’s was mooted by her obtaining a sufficient number of signatures without judicial modification.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; intervention; laches.

Electronic Ballot-Petition Signatures in Rhode Island During a Pandemic
Acosta v. Restrepo (Mary S. McElroy, D.R.I. 1:20-cv-262)
Because of the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, a district judge in Rhode Island ordered election officials to accept ballot-petition signatures electronically.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19.

No Constitutional Right to Greater Publicization of Early Voting for a Special Congressional Election
McMurray v. Mohr (Lawrence J. Vilardo, W.D.N.Y. 1:20-cv-689)
A district judge denied immediate relief to plaintiffs who sought an injunction requiring county election officials to publicize more widely early-voting opportunities for a special congressional election.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; Covid-19; interlocutory appeal.

No Relief from Reductions in Polling Locations in Kentucky During a Pandemic
Nemes v. Bensinger (Charles R. Simpson III, W.D. Ky. 3:20-cv-407)
Because of the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, some populous counties in Kentucky planned to operate only one polling place each for a primary election in which voting by mail would be encouraged. A federal judge denied a requested injunction to require more polling places.
Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Poll locations; Covid-19; intervention; case assignment; recusal; primary election.

Initiative Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Idaho During an Infectious Pandemic
Reclaim Idaho v. Little (B. Lynn Winmill, D. Idaho 1:20-cv-268)
Because of social distancing made necessary by the global infectious Covid-19 pandemic, sponsors of a ballot initiative sought modifications to the ballot-petition signature requirements. A district judge decided that the plaintiffs were entitled to relief and suggested two possibilities. The state instead sought a stay of the injunction. Although the district court and the court of appeals denied the state a stay, the Supreme Court granted one, and online signature-collection efforts ceased. The plaintiffs then determined that court resolution of their case through the federal court’s three levels would take too long to make certification of their initiative for the ballot possible.
Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Covid-19; getting on the ballot; ballot measure; enforcing orders; interlocutory appeal; laches.

No Additional Polling Place in Washington, D.C.’s Ward 8 During the Covid-19 Pandemic
Robinson v. Board of Elections (Dabney L. Friedrich, D.D.C. 1:20-cv-1364)
Because of poor mail service in the ward and health risks resulting from the Covid-19 global infectious pandemic, two plaintiffs sought an order requiring the establishment of an additional polling location in their ward. The district judge denied immediate relief.
Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Poll locations; Covid-19.

Relief from Absentee-Ballot Application Deadline Because of Overwhelmed Website
Nicholas Jones for Congress v. Idaho Secretary of State (B. Lynn Winmill, D. Idaho 1:20-cv-242)
During the 2020 Covid-19 global infectious pandemic, a federal district judge extended the absentee-ballot application deadline by one week because the secretary of state’s application website was overwhelmed.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; attorney fees; primary election.

Reductions in Signatures Required to Get on the Ballot in Maryland Because of a Pandemic
Maryland Green Party v. Hogan (Ellen Lipton Hollander, 1:20-cv-1253) and Ivey v. Lamone (1:20-cv-1995) and Dhillon v. Wobensmith (1:20-cv-2197) (Richard D. Bennett) (D. Md.)
Two district judges in the District of Maryland issued consent decrees relaxing ballot-petition signature requirements for the November 3, 2020, general election in light of social distancing made necessary by a pandemic. A third case seeking further modifications was unsuccessful.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; case assignment; attorney fees.

No Immediate Relief from Expanded Absentee-Voting Opportunities During an Infectious Pandemic Because of a Delay in Bringing the Case
Curtin v. Virginia State Board of Elections (Rossie D. Alston, Jr., E.D. Va. 1:20-cv-546)
Because of the Covid-19 global infectious pandemic, Virginia voters were permitted to vote absentee on account of disability. A suit challenging broad absentee-voting rights as diluting plaintiffs’ voting rights did not result in immediate relief, because the suit was brought about two months after the guidelines became public. After the preliminary-injunction decision, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; laches; primary election; case assignment; recusal; early voting.

Opportunity to Cure Missing and Mismatched Absentee-Ballot Signatures in California
Fugazi v. Padilla (Kimberly J. Mueller, E.D. Cal. 2:20-cv-970)
A candidate and several voters challenged the certification of a primary election, alleging that absentee voters were not given sufficient opportunities to cure missing or mismatched signatures. Absentee voting was important in the election because of a global infectious pandemic. The district judge denied the plaintiffs immediate relief because although a mailing to voters who had signature problems was confusing, and the election office was closed to visitors, clarifications were available by telephone.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Signature matching; absentee ballots; Covid-19; enjoining certification; intervention; primary election; class action.

No Relief from a Constitutional-Amendment Waiting-Time Requirement During a Pandemic
Fight Back Fund v. Illinois State Board of Elections (Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, N.D. Ill. 1:20-cv-2791)
During a global infectious pandemic, supporters of a state constitutional amendment sought relief from a requirement that proposed amendments be passed by the legislature at least six months before an election, in light of interruptions to the legislature’s work because of the pandemic. The district judge denied immediate relief, because the legislature had not yet passed the plaintiffs’ proposal.
Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Ballot measure; getting on the ballot; Covid-19; case assignment.

No Relief from New York’s Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements During the Covid-19 Pandemic
Murray v. Cuomo (Mary Kay Vyskocil, 1:20-cv-3571) and Eisen v. Cuomo (Philip M. Halpern, 7:20-cv-5121) (S.D.N.Y.)
A plaintiff, whose ballot-petition signatures for a primary election were ruled invalid because the signatures had not been collected or witnessed by a member of the party, was denied relief from a signature requirement that was both shortened in time and in number because of an infectious pandemic. Later, a different judge denied another prospective congressional candidate relief from ballot-petition signature requirements.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; matters for state courts; primary election; party procedures.

No Pandemic Relief from a Ballot-Petition Signature Requirement for Signatures Due Very Early in the Pandemic
Garcia v. Griswold (William J. Martinez, D. Colo. 1:20-cv-1268)
A prospective primary-election candidate sought relief from a state supreme court denying her relief from the ballot-petition signature requirement despite social distancing made necessary by a global infectious pandemic. The federal district judge denied the candidate relief because of her delay in bringing the case and because the pandemic had a small impact on signature gathering, as signatures were due early in the pandemic.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; laches; intervention; primary election; matters for state courts; case assignment.

Suits to Extend Deadlines for Ballot-Petition Signatures in Nevada During a Pandemic
Fair Maps Nevada v. Cegavske (Miranda M. Du, 3:20-cv-271) and Fight for Nevada v. Cegavske (Richard F. Boulware II, 2:20-cv-837) (D. Nev.)
An organization collecting signatures to put a constitutional amendment on Nevada’s ballot received a court-ordered extension of the due date during a global infectious pandemic, which triggered state-ordered social distancing, on a finding of diligence in collecting signatures before social distancing went into effect. An organization seeking the recall of Nevada’s governor did not receive a deadline extension on a finding that it collected few signatures before social-distancing requirements.
Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Ballot measure; Covid-19; getting on the ballot.

Canceling an Election During a Pandemic
Yang v. New York State Board of Elections (1:20-cv-3325) and Key v. Cuomo (1:20-cv-3533) (Analisa Torres, S.D.N.Y.)
Because all but one candidate for a party’s presidential nomination had announced suspension of their campaigns, and in light of a global infectious pandemic, election officials in New York canceled the party’s 2020 presidential primary election, leaving in place primary elections for other offices in most of the state’s counties. A district judge and the court of appeals concluded that it was unconstitutional to remove from the ballots candidates who had merely suspended their campaigns.
Subject: Election dates. Topics: Enjoining elections; Covid-19; primary election; getting on the ballot; intervention; absentee ballots; party procedures; class action.

Ohio’s Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements During a Pandemic
Thompson v. DeWine (Edmund A. Sargus, Jr., 2:20-cv-2129), Duncan v. LaRose (Michael H. Watson, 2:20-cv-2295), and Hawkins v. DeWine (James L. Graham, 2:20-cv-2781) (S.D. Ohio)
Federal actions sought modifications of Ohio’s requirements for getting candidates and measures on the ballot in a time of social distancing to prevent transmission of Covid-19 during a global pandemic: acceptance of electronic signatures, a reduced signature requirement, and extended deadlines. One district judge ordered acceptance of electronic signatures and an extension of the deadline but not a reduction in the number of signatures required. The court of appeals, however, stayed the injunction, finding ballot-access requirements modest even during the pandemic. A second judge denied relief to a pro se minor presidential candidate. A third judge denied relief, reasoning in part that social distancing is not state action.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; intervention; ballot measure; pro se party; case assignment.

Electronic At-Home Absentee Voting for Blind Voters
Powell v. Benson (Gershwin A. Drain, E.D. Mich. 2:20-cv-11023), Drenth v. Boockvar (Jennifer P. Wilson, M.D. Pa. 1:20-cv-829), Hernandez v. New York State Board of Elections (Lewis J. Liman, S.D.N.Y. 1:20-cv-4003), Merrill v. Dunlap (John A. Woodcock, Jr., D. Me. 1:20-cv-248), and Rivero v. Galvin (Douglas P. Woodlock, D. Mass. 1:20-cv-11808)
In light of the greater need for absentee voting in 2020 because of the Covid-19 global infectious pandemic, lawsuits in five states resulted in electronic at-home absentee voting for blind voters that protected the secrecy of their ballots.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee ballots; Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA); intervention; class action; primary election.

Whether Voting by Mail During a Pandemic Dilutes Legitimate Votes
Paher v. Cegavske (Miranda M. Du, D. Nev. 3:20-cv-243)
A district judge denied an injunction to voters who complained that extensive voting by mail during a global infectious pandemic would dilute legitimate votes, finding the allegation too speculative to afford standing or merit relief.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee ballots; intervention; primary election.

Nullification of an Absentee-Ballot Witness Requirement During a Global Infectious Pandemic
League of Women Voters of Virginia v. Virginia State Board of Elections (Norman K. Moon, W.D. Va. 6:20-cv-24)
During the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, seven weeks before a primary election, a district judge approved a consent decree that nullified the witness requirement for absentee ballots in the election. Later, the judge approved a similar consent decree for the general election.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee ballots; intervention; primary election; attorney fees.

Modification of Utah’s Signature Requirements for a Prospective Candidate During an Infectious Pandemic
Garbett v. Herbert (2:20-cv-245) and Brown v. Herbert (1:20-cv-52) (Robert J. Shelby, D. Utah)
A district court modified the ballot-petition signature requirement for a prospective gubernatorial candidate because of social distancing during the Covid-19 global infectious pandemic. Even with the modified requirement, the plaintiff was unable to qualify for the primary-election ballot. After the injunction was issued, a prospective legislative candidate sought relief from the ballot-petition signature requirements, but the court denied the second plaintiff relief.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; Covid-19; case assignment; primary election; interlocutory appeal; intervention; pro se party.

Whether Requiring Postage for a Mailed Ballot Is an Unconstitutional Poll Tax
Black Voters Matter Fund v. Raffensperger (Amy Totenberg, N.D. Ga. 1:20-cv-1489)
In light of widespread absentee voting by mail during the 2020 global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, a federal complaint alleged that requiring voters to pay the postage was an unconstitutional poll tax. The district judge denied relief for an imminent primary election for practical reasons. After careful consideration of the law and the facts, the judge ultimately decided that absentee-ballot postage is not a poll tax.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee ballots; class action; primary election.

No Relief from the Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements for Arizona Initiatives During a Pandemic
Arizonans for Fair Elections v. Hobbs (Dominic W. Lanza, D. Ariz. 2:20-cv-658)
A district judge declined to order Arizona to accept electronic signatures to get initiatives on the November ballot during social distancing made necessary by a global infectious pandemic. The judge was not confident that the proposed remedy would not conflict with Arizona’s constitution, which the plaintiffs had not challenged. Moreover, the judge was not convinced that the pandemic would persist or that the plaintiffs could not have qualified their initiatives for the ballot had they collected the signatures required before the pandemic.
Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Ballot measure; getting on the ballot; Covid-19; intervention; matters for state courts; laches.

Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois During a Pandemic
Libertarian Party of Illinois v. Pritzker (1:20-cv-2112) and Morgan v. White (1:20-cv-2189) (Rebecca R. Pallmeyer and Charles R. Norgle, Sr., N.D. Ill.) and Bambenek v. White (Sue E. Myerscough, C.D. Ill. 3:20-cv-3107)
Lawsuits filed in two of Illinois’s districts sought modifications to ballot-petition signature requirements in light of social distancing made necessary by the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic. An agreed order modified the requirements for candidates. The district judge gave election officials part of the adjustments from the agreed order that they requested, and the court of appeals declined to stay the district judge’s decision. District judges in both districts denied relief from the signature requirements for ballot measures.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; ballot measure; Covid-19; case assignment; interlocutory appeal; laches; intervention; attorney fees.

Ballot-Petition Signature Deadlines in Michigan During a Pandemic
Esshaki v. Whitmer (Terrence G. Berg, 2:20-cv-10831), SawariMedia v. Whitmer (Matthew F. Leitman, 4:20-cv-11246), Kishore v. Whitmer (Sean F. Cox, 2:20-cv-11605), Detroit Unity Fund v. Whitmer (Stephanie Dawkins Davis, 4:20-cv-12016), Jobs for Downriver v. Whitmer (George Caram Steeh, 2:20-cv-12115), and Eason v. Whitmer (Robert H. Cleland, 3:20-cv-12252) (E.D. Mich.)
Because of Michigan’s stay-at-home order during the Covid-19 pandemic, a district judge extended the deadline for candidates’ ballot-petition signatures and halved the number of signatures required. The court of appeals ruled that the judge was right on the merits but not empowered to specify the remedy. On remand, the district judge ruled that the state’s implemented remedy did not quite pass constitutional muster, and the judge informed the state defendants of a possible constitutional remedy. In a second case involving a proposed statewide initiative, the state never proposed to a second judge an adequate remedy, but the case was ultimately withdrawn for failure to provide evidence of substantial signature-collection results. Two additional judges denied ballot-petition signature relief, and a fifth case before a fifth judge was dismissed by stipulation. A sixth judge dismissed an action filed more than a month after the ballot-petition deadline.
Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Covid-19; getting on the ballot; ballot measure; laches; primary election; intervention; attorney fees; pro se party.

Unsuccessful Challenge to Ohio’s Changed Primary-Election Procedures During the Covid-19 Pandemic
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose (Michael H. Watson, S.D. Ohio 2:20-cv-1638)
A district judge found that Ohio’s primary-election accommodations for the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 did not result in unconstitutionally cumbersome voting.
Subject: Registration procedures. Topics: Covid-19; registration procedures; absentee ballots; National Voter Registration Act; primary election; intervention.

Standing to Seek an Absentee-Ballot Extension During a Pandemic
Mays v. Thurston (James M. Moody, Jr., E.D. Ark. 4:20-cv-341)
A district judge denied a request for an order during a global infectious pandemic extending the deadline for absentee ballots from received by election day to mailed by election day, finding that any difficulty that the plaintiffs would have in submitting their absentee ballots on time would arise from the pandemic and not from state action.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee ballots.

Election Modifications in Wisconsin Because of a Pandemic
Democratic National Committee v. Bostelmann (3:20-cv-249), Gear v. Knudson (3:20-cv-278), and Lewis v. Knudson (3:20-cv-284) (William M. Conley, W.D. Wis.) and City of Green Bay v. Bostelmann (William C. Griesbach, 1:20-cv-479) and Taylor v. Milwaukee Election Commission (Pamela Pepper, 2:20-cv-545) (E.D. Wis.)
In light of a global infectious pandemic, federal litigation to modify election procedures for the April 2020 election in Wisconsin, which included a presidential primary election, began about three weeks before the election. Shortly after a complaint was filed, and again a few days before the election, a federal judge in the Western District of Wisconsin ordered some modifications to enable absentee voting by mail. The judge declined to order a delay in the election. The court of appeals reversed the district judge’s modification to absentee-voter witness-certification requirements, and the Supreme Court reversed the district judge’s extension of time to mail absentee ballots after election day. Suits in the Eastern District were unsuccessful. For the general election in November, the Western District judge again ordered modifications, but the court of appeals stayed the injunction. After the election, the court of appeals vacated the injunction.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; registration procedures; absentee ballots; enjoining elections; interlocutory appeal; voter identification; intervention; primary election; voting technology; attorney fees; case assignment; class action.

No Ordered Modification of Absentee-Ballot Procedures on the Night Before an Election
Williams v. DeSantis (Robert L. Hinkle, N.D. Fla. 1:20-cv-67)
During the global infectious Covid-19 pandemic, a federal judge declined to modify absentee-ballot provisions in a presidential primary election in response to a complaint filed on the night before election day.
Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Absentee ballots; Covid-19; laches; intervention; case assignment; primary election.