9 results for 'cat:"Elections" AND cat:"Equal Protection"'.
J. Brody finds that the district court properly rejected a challenge to recent legislation ending the acceptance of social security numbers and student identification cards at polls. While the challengers raised a constitutional issue sufficient for standing, the legislature has the authority to place qualifications and conditions on the right of suffrage and the new laws are reasonably related to preserving the integrity of the election process. The potential for additional burdens on some voters is not so great that the right of suffrage is annulled and the new laws' goal of creating uniformity does not violate equal protection rights. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Brody, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 51227, Categories: elections, equal Protection
J. Robinson rules a civilian may pursue retaliation claims against a board of City commissioners. The civilian, a Republican candidate for County Commissioner, sufficiently showed in court that the board chilled his speech by interrupting him during public commentary.
Court: USDC Kansas, Judge: Robinson, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv4107, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, elections, equal Protection
J. Quattlebaum upholds the dismissal of two parents’ claims challenging the constitutionality of their county school board’s election process for choosing a high school student-member of the board. It does not violate the free exercise of religion because the county does not allow any sort of private school, religious or nonreligious, to participate in selecting the student member. It does not violate the equal protection clause because the process does not need to conform to the principle of “one person, one vote,” as prospective student members do not participate in a popular election but instead are appointed for what is essentially a civics laboratory. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Quattlebaum, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 22-2294, Categories: Education, elections, equal Protection
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 Free
J. Bacon finds claims of partisan gerrymandering are justiciable under the Equal Protection clause of the New Mexico Constitution because such cases involve vote dilution and threaten the right to vote of every citizen in the state, while allowing the judicial system to correct extreme cases of partisanship do not violate the separation of powers doctrine or constitute judicial policymaking. This court and others that consider gerrymandering cases will adopt the three-part test, which includes intent, effects, and causation, and apply intermediate scrutiny to determine whether legislative maps are "egregious partisan gerrymanders" that violate New Mexico's constitution.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Bacon, Filed On: September 22, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-39481, Categories: Constitution, elections, equal Protection