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
New Georgia Project v. Raffensperger
Closed
New Georgia Project v. Raffensperger, No. 1:20-cv-01986 (N.D. Ga.) |
||
| Case Summary | Challenges Georgia’s (i) failure to provide prepaid postage, (ii) Election Day Receipt Deadline, (iii) voter assistance ban, and (iv) lack of standards for notifying voters with incomplete absentee ballot applications. Plaintiffs argue that these restrictions pose an undue burden on the right to vote generally and particularly in the upcoming election as a result of the COVID-19 crisis. | |
| Filed | 05/08/2020 | |
| State | Georgia | |
| Type of Court | Federal | |
| Circuit | Eleventh Circuit | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 03/14/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Postage Requirement, Notice/Cure for Mismatches Missing Signature or Mistakes, Restriction on Assistance or Collection of Mail Ballots for Return, Mail Voting Deadlines (for Applying, Receiving, Postmark)) Failure to notify voters of incomplete/infirm ballot applications |
|
| Complaint(s) | 05/08/2020: Complaint filed. | |
| 06/03/2020: Complaint, Amended Complaint. filed. | ||
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 08/31/2020: Order/Ruling, The Court GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The Court granted a Preliminary Injunction effectively extending the receipt deadline for absentee ballots. The Court ENJOINED “Defendants, their officers, employees, and agents, all persons acting in active concert or participation with Defendants, or under Defendants’ supervision, direction, or control (collectively “Defendants”) from enforcing O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(F), which requires absentee ballots to be received by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day to be counted. The Court ORDERED that Defendants shall accept and count otherwise valid absentee ballots from qualified voters that are postmarked by Election Day, and arrive at their respective county’s office within three (3) business days of Election Day by 7:00 p.m. In the same order, the Court denied Plaintiffs’ request to enjoin Defendants from implementing or enforcing four other election laws: (i) O.C.G.A. § 21-2-381(b)(4) (requiring election officials to “promptly” notify voters whose identity it could not discern, where promptly is not defined); (ii) O.C.G.A. § 21-2-381(a)(1)(G) (absentee age restriction allowing voters over the age of 65 to make one absentee request for all elections in an election season while other voters must request an absentee ballot for each individual election in the election season. The court ruled that the 26th Amendment claim is likely subject to rational basis review); (iii) the absentee postage requirement; and (iv) O.C.G.A. § 21-2-385(a) (voter assistance ban). | |
| 09/16/2020: Order/Ruling, The disctrict court found that defendants failed to make a strong showing that they will succeed on the merits: defendants will not suffer irreparable harm absent a stay, plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm if a stay is issued, and the public will be served by the injunction. For these reasons, the court denied the defendant's motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. | ||
| 10/02/2020: Order/Ruling, The appellate court granted defendant's motion to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal. The court found that 1) the defendants are likely succeed on the merits, 2) the defendant will suffer irreparable injury absent a stay, 3) the stay will not substantially injure the plaintiffs, and 4) a stay is in the public interest. | ||
New Georgia Project v. Raffensperger, No. 20-13360 (11th Cir.) |
||
| Case Summary | Issue on Appeal: In light of the fact that early voting for the November 2020 election has already begun, whether the District Court erred in granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, in part, and enjoining Appellants and the County Defendants from enforcing O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(F), requiring ballots be returned to county boards of registrars by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day to be counted, and instead requiring county boards to accept and count absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day, and arrive at their respective county's office within three (3) business days of Election Day by 7:00 p.m. | |
| Filed | 09/04/2020 | |
| State | Georgia | |
| Type of Court | Federal | |
| Circuit | Eleventh Circuit | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 03/14/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Mail Voting Deadlines (for Applying, Receiving, Postmark)) | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 09/04/2020: Other | |
| 10/02/2020: Other, The 11th Circuit held that the District Court had misapplied the Anderson-Burdick framework when it enjoined the State defendants’ enforcement of the Georgia absentee ballot deadline, which required ballots to be received by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day to be counted. They therefore stayed Defendant's motion to stay the injunction. | ||
| 01/07/2021: Appellant Brief, Defendant-appellants argue that the court should be dismissed for mootness. Because plaintiffs' claims are for injunctive relief regarding the 2020 election, they are no longer "a live controversy with respect to which the court can give meaningful relief." In the alternative, appellants argue that the district court's injunction was in error because of a misapplication of the Anderson-Burdick analysis. | ||
| 03/09/2021: Other, The court dismissed the appeal pursuant to defendant-appellants' unopposed motion to dismiss. | ||
