About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 Robert Timothy Reagan, et al., Voter Interference 1 (2018)

handle is hein.congcourts/fjcvtif0001 and id is 1 raw text is: CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION Voter Interference Democratic National Committee v. Republican National Committee (Dickinson R. Debevoise and John Michael Vazquez, D.N.J. 2:81-cv-3876), Arizona Democratic Party v. Arizona Republican Party (John J. Tuchi, D. Ariz. 2:16-cv-3752), Nevada State Democratic Party v. Nevada Republican Party (Richard F. Boulware H, D. Nev. 2:16-cv-2514), Ohio Democratic Party v. Ohio Republican Party (James S. Gwin, N.D. Ohio 1:16-cv-2645), Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Republican Party of Pennsylvania (Paul S. Diamond, E.D. Pa. 2:16-cv-5664), North Carolina Democratic Party v. North Carolina Republican Party (Catherine C. Eagles, M.D.N.C. 1:16-cv-1288), and Michigan Democratic Party v. Michigan Republican Party (Mark A. Goldsmith, E.D. Mich. 2:16-cv-13924) A voter in Ohio moved to intervene in a 1981 District of New Jersey case, complaining that widespread voter registration challenges in Ohio violated a consent decree between the two major political par- ties in the New Jersey case. On the day before the 2004 election, the district court in New Jersey granted injunctive relief. A panel of the court of appeals, over a dissent, denied the defendants a stay, but the full court ordered en banc review on election day. Because the plaintiff was allowed to vote, the appeal was subsequently declared moot. In 2016, a suit was again filed in the District of New Jersey to enforce and extend the consent decree. Related actions were filed in six other states, plaintiffs were denied immediate relief there, and the actions were dismissed voluntarily after the election. A little more than one year later, the consent decree was terminated. Subject: Campaign activities. Topics: Registration challenges; intervention; enforcing orders; laches; case assignment. A consent decree issued as a result of 1981 litigation between the two major parties was litigated in advance of the 2004, 2008, and 2016 general elections. The consent decree was terminated on January 8, 2018.1 Ohio 2004 Five days before the 2004 general election, two Ohio voters filed a motion in the District of New Jersey to reopen and intervene in a 1981 case, alleging that widespread voter registration challenges in Ohio violated consent de- 1. Consent Decree Termination Order, Democratic Nat'l Comm. v. Republican Nat'l Comm., No. 2:81-cv-3876 (D.N.J. Jan. 8, 2018), D.E. 213, appeal pending, Docket Sheet, Democratic Nat'l Comm. v. Republican Nat'l Comm., No. 18-1215 (3d Cir. Feb 5,2018). Federal Judicial Center 2/7/2018 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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most