10 results for 'cat:"Constitution" AND cat:"Elections" AND cat:"Government"'.
Per curiam, the U.S. Supreme Court finds that the Colorado Supreme Court improperly excluded Donald Trump from the 2024 election ballot for inciting a fatal and destructive riot after he lost the 2020 election because only Congress has the power to declare someone ineligible for becoming president under the fourteenth amendment. Reversed.
Court: US Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 23-719, Categories: constitution, elections, government
J. Biggs overrules the North Carolina NAACP’s objection to a magistrate judge’s order denying the NAACP’s motion to reopen discovery in this case challenging a state Senate bill regarding voter identification requirements. The NAACP claims the bill is unconstitutional and discriminatory and made a motion for a brief period in which to reopen and update discovery in light of newly admitted parties. The magistrate judge necessarily denied the motion after allowing the NAACP to propose it to the state board parties first, who denied it. Also, the NAACP claims that the state board parties are obligated to present all public records concerning the Senate bill, the decision about which is given back to the magistrate judge.
Court: USDC Middle District of North Carolina, Judge: Biggs, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv1034, NOS: Voting - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, elections, government
J. Nugent grants the Ohio Secretary of State's motion for summary judgment, ruling all of the changes to election procedures contained in House Bill 458 are minor in nature and, therefore, do not constitute an undue burden on voters that would render the bill unconstitutional. Although only photo IDs may be used for in-person voting moving forward, evidence indicates the majority of registered voters already have a valid driver's license. Furthermore, the elimination of early, in-person voting the Monday before Election Day does not impact a large number of voters, especially considering the voting hours were reallocated elsewhere.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Nugent, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv26, NOS: Voting - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, elections, government
Per curiam, the Colorado Supreme Court finds the actions of former President Donald Trump to encourage and incite an insurrection disqualify him from being placed on the Republican primary ballot for the 2024 presidential election under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The portion of the amendment that precludes an insurrectionist from holding officer was intended to be self-executing and, therefore, no act of Congress is required to allow the court to enforce it, although in anticipation of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the decision will be stayed until January 4, 2024.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 2023CO63, Categories: constitution, elections, government
J. Donovan affirms the dismissal of the complaint raised by a group of registered New Hampshire voters suing their secretary of state for partisan gerrymandering. The voters fail to identify a mandatory constitutional provision that has been violated, which is necessary for the judicial system to intervene to prevent gerrymandering without overstepping and exerting authority where the legislative system is meant to have authority.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Judge: Donovan, Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: 2022-0629, Categories: constitution, elections, government
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. Flanagan grants a municipality, its councilmembers, mayor and board of elections their motion to dismiss violations of the 14th Amendment brought by a group of registered voters. One of the voters, when challenging redistricting over the years, said that the maps had been drawn by “partisan Democrats” who thought that “the people of Jacksonville are simply too racist to elect a non-white councilmember.” The voters have failed to allege any specific and definitive harm done by the municipality and its representatives in redistricting.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Flanagan, Filed On: August 22, 2023, Case #: 7:22cv171, NOS: Voting - Civil Rights, Categories: constitution, elections, government
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds the petitioners are not entitled to a writ of mandamus to remove a proposed constitutional amendment from the August 8, 2023 special election ballot. The legislature is allowed under the state constitution to schedule a special election date not authorized by any statute. Although the state's constitution requires a specific date for general elections, there is no such restriction on special elections for constitutional amendments, so long as three-fifths of both assemblies agree to the date, and because that is the case here, the election will proceed as scheduled.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1992, Categories: constitution, elections, government
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds petitioners are entitled to a partial writ of mandamus to change the title language of the August ballot initiative regarding future changes to the Ohio Constitution. The inclusion of the word "any" is likely to confuse voters about which constitutional amendments are covered by the initiative. Therefore, the ballot initiative language will be changed to remove "any" and prevent confusion regarding whether amendments proposed by the legislature are covered under the initiative.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1928, Categories: constitution, elections, government
J. Hagedorn finds the circuit court improperly determined a ballot question regarding an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution codifying Marsy's Law, which reconfigured the respective rights of victims in criminal proceedings and those accused of crimes, failed to meet all the constitutional requirements for formulating and submitting ballot questions to voters. Taken in context of the original meaning of the relevant constitutional provisions, which give the legislature broad authority over the manner of submitting ballot questions to voters, the Marsy's Law ballot question was not "fundamentally counterfactual" to its intended purpose such that voters were misled by it, so the advocates' challenge to the question on that basis and the argument that it should have been split into more than one question fail. The ballot question was not submitted to the people in violation of the state constitution, and it was validly ratified. Reversed.
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court, Judge: Hagedorn, Filed On: May 16, 2023, Case #: 2020AP002003, Categories: constitution, elections, government