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
In re: Canvassing Observation
Closed
In re: Canvassing Observation, No. 7003 (Penn. Ct. Common Pleas, Philadelphia Cnty.) |
||
| Case Summary | Petitioners, the Trump campaign, alleged that poll observers did not have sufficient proximity to canvassing. | |
| Filed | 11/03/2020 | |
| State | Pennsylvania | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 05/13/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Poll Observer Access) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 11/03/2020: Order/Ruling, The presiding election day judge, based on the witness's testimony, held that Philadelphia was complying with canvassing observer requirements as set forth in Pennsylvania law. | |
In re: Canvassing Observation, No. 1094 CD 2020 (Penn. Commonw. Ct.) |
||
| Case Summary | The Trump campaign appealed the court of claims ruling that Philadelphia county was complying with poll observer requirements. | |
| Filed | 11/04/2020 | |
| State | Pennsylvania | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 03/13/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Poll Observer Access) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 11/04/2020: Appellant Brief | |
| 11/05/2020: Order/Ruling, The appeals court reversed the court of claims, and held that all candidates, watchers, or candidate representatives be permitted to observe the canvassing processes within 6 feet. | ||
In re: Canvassing Observation, No. 30 EAP 2020 (Penn. Sup. Ct.) |
||
| Case Summary | Philadelphia county appeals the commonwealth court's reversal. | |
| Filed | 11/05/2020 | |
| State | Pennsylvania | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 03/13/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Poll Observer Access) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 11/17/2020: Order/Ruling, The Supreme Court found that the procedures for poll observing that the Philadelphia Board of Elections had implemented were reasonable under law. The court held that the legislature held proximity parameters to the discretion of county boards of elections. The court concluded that, based on the plaintiffs' witness's own testimony, he had sufficient access to observe under the Election Code. | |
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Degraffenreid, No. 30 EAP 2020 (Sup. Ct.) |
||
| Case Summary | Petitioner, President Trump, consolidates and seeks review of three Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions: In re Canvass of Absentee & Mail-In Ballots of Nov. 3, 2020 Gen. Election (date and signature), In re Canvassing Observation (poll observation), and In re November 3, 2020 Gen. Election (signature verification standards). The Petitioner alleges that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court impermissibly altered the manner of elections in violation of the Electors Clause. Petitioner requests that the Court remand the matter to the Pennsylvania state legislature, which can select its own slate of electors in place of those selected by popular vote. | |
| Filed | 12/20/2020 | |
| State | Pennsylvania | |
| Type of Court | Federal | |
| Circuit | US Supreme Court | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 02/22/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Signature Verification Standards, Poll Observer Access, Notice/Cure for Mismatches Missing Signature or Mistakes) Authority To Act (Electors Clause) |
|
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 12/21/2020: Appellant Brief | |
| 01/11/2021: Order/Ruling, The Court denied petitioner's motion to expedite. | ||
| 02/22/2021: Other, Cert denied. | ||
