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

1 Whether Counties Could Establish More than One Absentee Ballot Drop Box 1 (2021)

handle is hein.congcourts/fjcwcce0001 and id is 1 raw text is: CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION 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 appeals stayed the injunction. Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Early voting; absentee ballots; COVID-19; equal protection; matters for state courts; interlocutory appeal; intervention. A Wednesday, August 26, 2020, federal complaint filed in the Northern Dis- trict of Ohio challenged a decision by Ohio's secretary of state to allow only one drop box per county for absentee ballot applications and absentee ballots at a time of widespread absentee voting because of social distancing made nec- essary by the global COVID-19 infectious pandemic and uncertainty about whether the postal service could handle the volume.1 Judge Dan Aaron Polster set the case for a telephone conference on Mon- day.2 On the following Friday, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction' and a motion to expedite briefing, with the reply brief due on Sep- tember 15.' Judge Polster set the case for another telephone conference on Tuesday, September 8, the day after Labor Day.' On September 9, Judge Polster set the case for an injunction hearing on September 23, consolidating consideration of a preliminary injunction and a permanent injunction because of the urgency of a final decision and making the reply brief due on September 21.6 Judge Polster held an additional tele- phone conference in the interim.7 1. Complaint, A. Philip Randolph Inst. of Ohio v. LaRose, No. 1:20-cv-1908 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 26, 2020), D.E. 1; A. Philip Randolph Inst. of Ohio v. LaRose, __ F. Supp 3d __, __, 2020 WL 5909804 (N.D. Ohio 2020) (p.1 of opinion filed at N.D. Ohio, No. 1:20-cv-1908, D.E. 88). 2. Docket Sheet, A. Philip Randolph Inst. of Ohio, No. 1:20-cv-1908 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 26, 2020) (Aug. 31, 2020, notice); see Transcript, id. (Aug. 31, 2020, filed Sept. 4, 2020), D.E. 12. 3. Preliminary Injunction Motion, id. (Sept. 4, 2020), D.E. 13. 4. Motion to Expedite Briefing, id. (Sept. 4, 2020), D.E. 14. 5. Docket Sheet, supra note 2 (Sept. 8, 2020, notice); see Transcript, A. Philip Randolph Inst. of Ohio, No. 1:20-cv-1908 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 8, 2020, filed Sept. 15, 2020), D.E. 29. 6. Docket Sheet, supra note 2 (Sept. 9, 2020, minute order). 7. Transcript,A. Philip Randolph Inst. of Ohio, No. 1:20-cv-1908 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 17, 2020, filed Sept. 21, 2020), D.E. 42; Docket Sheet, supra note 2 (Sept. 21, 2020, minutes). Federal Judicial Center 1/30/2021 I

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