This database consolidates and tracks litigation concerning the effect of the pandemic on election law. The purpose of this tool is to provide an interactive list of relevant cases that can be searched by issue, court, status, and jurisdiction.
Case Details
Common Sense Party v. Padilla
Closed
Common Sense Party v. Padilla, No. 2:20-cv-01091 (E.D. Cal.), 2020 WL 3491041 |
||
| Case Summary | Plaintiffs of the Common Sense Party (CSP), a political “party-in-formation” challenge the constitutionality of the California Elections Code §5151 (c) as it applies to them. The code requires new political parties to secure 68,180 voter registrations in order to qualify for the November 2020 election ballot. Plaintiffs allege that the COVID-19 shutdown renders it impossible to comply with this requirement. Thus, Plaintiffs move for either a Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendant Secretary of State Alex Padilla from enforcing §5151(c) against them and requiring the Secretary of State to register the CSP as an official political party of California without the need for the CSP to obtain more voter registrations. The court denied both motions, concluding that Plaintiffs have failed to show they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims, especially to the level necessary to justify granting mandatory injunctive relief. | |
| Filed | 05/29/2020 | |
| State | California | |
| Type of Court | Federal | |
| Circuit | Ninth Circuit | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 09/01/2020 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Candidate Signature Requirement (Threshold Number) | |
| Complaint(s) | 05/29/2020: Complaint filed. | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 06/26/2020: Order/Ruling, The Court denied Plaintiff's Motions for TRO and/or Preliminary Injunction because they have failed to show they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims. Even in light of COVID-19 restrictions, §5151(c) does not impose a severe burden on plaintiffs, and thus the strict scrunity standard does not apply. Plaintiffs can still collect voter registrations online and in other ways that do not require in-person solicitation, and various clarifications of the stay-at-home orders intended to advise that election-related activities remained essential even during the shutdown. Additionally, stay-at-home orders only prohibited Plaintiffs from conducting in-person solitication, if at all, for a very short period of time. | |
Common Sense Party v. Padilla, No. 20-16335, 20-71888 (9th Cir.) |
||
| Case Summary | Plaintiffs of the Common Sense Party (CSP), a political “party-in-formation” challenge the constitutionality of the California Elections Code §5151 (c) as it applies to them. The code requires new political parties to secure 68,180 voter registrations in order to qualify for the November 2020 election ballot. Plaintiffs allege that the COVID-19 shutdown renders it impossible to comply with this requirement. Thus, Plaintiffs moved for either a Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendant Secretary of State Alex Padilla from enforcing §5151(c) against them and requiring the Secretary of State to register the CSP as an official political party of California without the need for the CSP to obtain more voter registrations. The court denied both motions, concluding that Plaintiffs have failed to show they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims, especially to the level necessary to justify granting mandatory injunctive relief. Plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit. In January, the court moved to rule only on the materials submitted, thus denying oral argument; appellants petitioned for reconsideration of the matter, which was denied. Appellee Alex Padilla motioned to take judicial notice, which was also denied. | |
| Filed | 07/10/2020 | |
| State | California | |
| Type of Court | Federal | |
| Circuit | Ninth Circuit | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 05/04/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Candidate Signature Requirement (Threshold Number) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 07/10/2020: Other, Filed | |
| 10/06/2020: Other, Petitioners (Common Sense Party) filed a motion to expedite the proceedings, which was denied. Docket tracking indicates that the court suggested dates to hear oral arguments in January of 2021, the next time the Ninth Circuit will sit in San Francisco. | ||
| 01/21/2021: Other, The court ruled the appeal as moot, thus dismissing the case. | ||
| 02/04/2021: Other, Appellants petitioned for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc following dismissal of their memorandum disposition. | ||
| 03/01/2021: Order/Ruling, The panel unanimously voted to deny panel rehearing and Judge Smith voted to deny appellants request for rehearing en banc, which was recommended similarly by Judges Wallace and Lasnik. No judge has requested a vote for en banc rehearing. | ||
