Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Biggs partially sustains a civil rights advocacy organization’s rejection of a magistrate judge’s memorandum opinion and recommendation in this ongoing voting rights suit. The judge incorrectly employed the moot doctrine because, although an amendment to a bill — which would prosecute anyone convicted of a crime if they vote — included a scienter requirement, the organization still has a concrete interest in the outcome of this litigation. The scienter requirement is still not specific enough about how someone convicted of a crime would restore the rights of their citizenship, so it is too vague and violates equal protection and due process rights. Thus, the organization still has a demonstrable interest, which the judge should have recognized, and the organization can proceed on a summary judgment motion.