About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

1 Robert Timothy Reagan, Unsuccessful Attempt at Federal Mandamus Relief against State Election Officials 1 (2018)

handle is hein.congcourts/fjcuafmr0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 

CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION


        Unsuccessful Attempt at Federal Mandamus
            Relief  Against State Election Officials
      Fox  v. Detzner  (Mark  E. Walker,  N.D.  Fla. 4:18-cv-529)
      A  district judge denied as beyond the court's jurisdiction a federal
      mandamus   action seeking an order requiring state election officials
      to  follow the law. The judge also denied a request for a temporary
      restraining order because the plaintiffs did not comply with the no-
      tice requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65.
           Subject: Voting procedures. Topics: Voting technology; matters
       for state courts; case assignment.
A November   13, 2018, Complaint in Mandamus   and Request for Expedited
Consideration filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Florida sought to compel Florida election officials to preserve election ballot
materials for the November  6 general election as required by law.' Among
other concerns, the plaintiffs-eight voters-alleged that [b]ecause of the
scheduled statewide recounts commencing  as soon as Sunday, November  11,
2008, the unpreserved digital ballot images are in danger of being obliterated
and overwritten by the tabulation of recounted ballots.2
    The prayer for relief included a temporary restraining order request.'
    Senior Judges Robert L. Hinkle' and William Stafford' disqualified them-
selves from the case in turn over the next two days. On Friday, November 16,
Judge Mark  E. Walker denied the plaintiffs immediate relief.6 First, a federal
court lacks the general power to issue writs of mandamus to direct state offic-
ers in the performance  of their duties when mandamus is   the only relief
sought.' Second, the plaintiffs had not followed the notice requirements that
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 requires for a temporary restraining order.'
    On Monday,   Judge Walker  instructed the plaintiffs to inform him how
they intended to proceed with the case by noon on the following day.' The
plaintiffs responded that they probably would file an amended  complaint
within the next several days. o




   1. Complaint, Foxv. Detzner, No. 4:18-cv-529 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2018), D.E. 1; see Jeffrey
Schweers, Seven Lawsuits and Counting: Tallahassee Is Ground Zero, Tallahassee Democrat,
Nov. 14, 2018, at A6.
   2. Complaint, supra note 1, at 3.
   3. Id. at 15.
   4. Disqualification, Fox, No. 4:18-cv-529 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 14,2018), D.E. 3.
   5. Disqualification, id. (Nov. 15, 2018), D.E. 4.
   6. Order, id. (Nov. 16, 2018), D.E. 6.
   7. Id. at 1-2 (citing Moye v. Clerk, 474 F.2d 1275, 1276 (5th Cir. 1973)).
   8. Id. at 2.
   9. Order, id. (Nov. 19, 2018), D.E. 26.
   10. Notice, id. (Nov. 20, 2018), D.E. 27.


Federal Judicial Center 12/13/2018


1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most