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
Brady v. State Ballot Law Commission (same as Campbell v. Galvin)
Closed. Consolidated With Another Case
Brady v. State Ballot Law Commission (same as Campbell v. Galvin), No. SJ-2020-0321 (Mass. S. Ct., Suffolk Cnty.) |
||
| Case Summary | Petitioner Helen Brady’s appealed the State Ballot Law Commission's (SBLC) order that Brady had failed to appropriately collect a sufficient amount of electronic signatures from registered voters in the 9th District in order to appear on the September 1, 2020 state electoral ballot. Because of a problem with the software, the SBLC had decided that all of the signatures Brady had collected were invalid for failure to comply with Goldstein. The Court overturned the SBLC's decision, ruling that these technological issues were not substantial enough to invalidate the signatures and frustrate the democratic expression of voters. | |
| Filed | 05/05/2020 | |
| State | Massachusetts | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed. Consolidated With Another Case | |
| Last Updated | 03/13/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Petition Signature Requirement (E-signatures) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 05/05/2020: Appellant Brief | |
| 06/02/2020: Order/Ruling, Relief Denied and MTD granted as to Petitioner Campbell; Matter Stayed with regards to Petitioner Brady pending new objections raised by SBLC | ||
| 07/02/2020: Order/Ruling, Reservation & Report. On June 11, 2020, the Court allowed a motion to dismiss the petition as moot with respect to Petitioners Colarusso and Hall, as those two petitioners have qualified for placement on the ballot. On July 2, the Court granted the motion to transfer the Suffolk Superior Court matter to this court and to consolidate it with Brady’s pending petition (Brady v. State Ballot Law Comm'n) for extraordinary relief. The judge exercised discretion to reserve and report the consolidated matter to the full court for decision. | ||
Brady v. State Ballot Law Commission (Brady v. State Ballot Law Commission No. SJ-2020-0321), No. SJC-12979 (Mass. S. Ct.) |
||
| Case Summary | Petitioner Helen Brady’s appealed the State Ballot Law Commission's (SBLC) order that Brady had failed to appropriately collect a sufficient amount of electronic signatures from registered voters in the 9th District in order to appear on the September 1, 2020 state electoral ballot. Because of a problem with the software, the SBLC had decided that all of the signatures Brady had collected were invalid for failure to comply with Goldstein. The Court overturned the SBLC's decision, ruling that these technological issues were not substantial enough to invalidate the signatures and frustrate the democratic expression of voters. | |
| Filed | 07/03/2020 | |
| State | Massachusetts | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 03/13/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Petition Signature Requirement (E-signatures) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 08/03/2020: Order/Ruling, Affirmed July 13, 2020 decision where the Court vacated the SBLC decision and ordered the Secretary to place Brady's name on the ballot for the State primary election. In this opinion, the Court further ordered the destruction of the data entered by voters in the process of signing Brady's nomination papers, and ordered Brady to file a written certification of compliance with the court within thirty days of the date of this decision. | |
