The post below delineates the state, the court, a shorthand indication of the issue(s) involved, and the date (and where I can, link) for decisions. [Note: this list does not purport to be a list of all current litigation over election issues. There was plenty of litigation before COVID-19 (some of which is still unresolved — indeed, some of which has been unresolved for years), and there have been some recent cases that don’t involve the pandemic. Election Law @ Moritz has continuing updates of the major election cases, COVID-19 and not; the Michigan Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse has continuing updates of the major COVID-19 cases, election and not. This list tries to capture all of the COVID-19 election cases, “major” and not. Also, thanks to Eda Harotounian, Erika De La Torre, David Nir, Richard Winger, and several readers for the assist on some of the details below.]. Click here.

 https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111962


The post below delineates the state, the court, a shorthand indication of the issue(s) involved, and the date (and where I can, link) for decisions.

[Note: this list does not purport to be a list of all current litigation over election issues. There was plenty of litigation before COVID-19 (some of which is still unresolved — indeed, some of which has been unresolved for years), and there have been some recent cases that don’t involve the pandemic. Election Law @ Moritz has continuing updates of the major election cases, COVID-19 and not; the Michigan Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse has continuing updates of the major COVID-19 cases, election and not. This list tries to capture all of the COVID-19 election cases, “major” and not. Also, thanks to Eda Harotounian, Erika De La Torre, David Nir, Richard Winger, and several readers for the assist on some of the details below.]

  • National: Jones v. U.S. Postal Service, No. 1:20-cv-06516 (S.D.N.Y.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Amd. complaint 9/9/20, PI (mostly) granted 9/21/20, order 9/25/20, clarification 9/29/20

  • National: Richardson v. Trump, No. 1:20-cv-02262 (D.D.C.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Amd. complaint 9/11/20, PI (mostly) granted 10/8/20, order 10/27/20, order 11/2/20, order 11/3/20

  • National: Washington v. Trump, No. 1:20-cv-03127 (E.D. Wash.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/18/20, PI granted 9/17/20, clarifying order 10/2/20, order 10/30/20

  • National: Nat’l Urban League v. DeJoy, No. 1:20-cv-02391 (D. Md.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/18/20

  • National: Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, No. 5:20-cv-05799 (N.D. Cal.), No. 20-16868 (9th Cir.), No. 20A62 (S. Ct.)
    Census operations
    Complaint 8/18/20, TRO granted 9/5/20, extended 9/17/20, PI granted 9/24/20, clarification 10/2/20, stay denied in part (10/31 deadline) and granted in part (12/31 deadline) 10/7/20, stayed 10/13/20

  • National: Johnakin v. U.S. Postal Service, No. 2:20-cv-04055 (E.D. Pa.)
    Mail (postal service practices, deadline)
    Complaint 8/19/20, settled 10/8/20

  • National: NAACP v. U.S. Postal Service, No. 1:20-cv-02295 (D.D.C.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/20/20, PI granted 10/10/20, order 11/3/20

  • National: Pennsylvania v. DeJoy, No. 2:20-cv-04096 (E.D. Pa.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/21/20, PI granted 9/28/20

  • National: New York v. Trump, No. 1:20-cv-02340 (D.D.C.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/25/20, PI granted 9/27/20

  • National: Vote Forward v. DeJoy, No. 1:20-cv-02405 (D.D.C.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 8/28/20, PI granted 9/28/20, order 9/30/30

  • National: Harrington v. DeJoy, No. 1:20-cv-05303 (N.D. Ill.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 9/8/20

  • National: 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East v. DeJoy, No. 1:20-cv-24069 (S.D. Fla.)
    Mail (postal service practices)
    Complaint 10/6/20, order 10/29/20

  • AK: Disability Law Ctr. of Alaska v. Meyer, No. 3AN-20-07060 (Alaska Super. Ct., 3d Dist.), No. 3:20-cv-00173 (D. Alaska), No. 20-35778 (9th Cir.)
    Mail (age)
    Complaint 7/17/20, PI denied 9/3/20, relief pending appeal denied 9/22/20

  • AK: Alaska Libertarian Party v. Fenumiai, No. 3:20-cv-00127 (D. Alaska)
    Signatures (threshold for party)
    Complaint 6/3/20, vol. dismissed 7/13/20

  • AK: Arctic Village Council v. Meyer, No. 3AN-20-07858CI (Alaska Super. Ct., 3d Dist.), No. S-17902 (Alaska Sup. Ct.)
    Mail (witness)
    Complaint 9/8/20, TRO denied 9/30/20, PI granted 10/5/20, aff’d 10/12/20

  • AK: Alaska Center Education Fund v. Fenumiai, No. 3AN-20-08354-CI (Alaska Super. Ct., 3d Dist.), No. S-17908 (Alaska Sup. Ct.)
    Mail (notice/cure)
    Complaint 10/7/20, PI denied 10/15/20, review denied 10/23/20

  • AL: People First of Ala. v. Merrill, No.2:20-cv-00619 (N.D. Ala), Nos. 20-12184, 20-13695-B (11th Cir.), Nos. 19A1063, 20A67 (S. Ct.)
    Mail (witness, ID), curbside voting
    Complaint 5/1/20, PI granted in part 6/15/20 (+statement of extra risk), stay denied 6/25/20, stay granted 7/2/20, appeal vol. dismissed 7/17/20
    Amd. complaint 7/6/20, order dismissing some claims and preserving others 8/17/20, decisions on summary judgment (granting some for defense, denying others) 9/8/20
    Lee Cnty. settlement 7/7/20 and 9/17/20, Jefferson Cnty. settlement 8/21/20, Madison Cnty. settlement 9/4/20, Wilcox Cnty. settlement 9/18/20, Lowndes Cnty. settlement 9/22/20
    Decision enjoining witness/ID requirement for heightened-risk voters, ban on curbside voting 9/30/20, stayed in part (witness/ID reinstated, but ban on curbside voting not stayed) 10/13/20, curbside voting stayed 10/21/20

  • AL: LWV of Ala. v. Merrill, No. 03-CV-2020-900702 00 (Ala. Cir. Ct., Montgomery Cnty.)
    Mail (excuse required, witness, ID, deadline), early voting
    Complaint 5/28/20, dismissed 8/5/20

  • AR: Mays v. Thurston, No. 4:20-cv-00341 (E.D. Ark.)
    Mail (deadline)
    Complaint 3/26/20, TRO denied 3/30/20, vol. dismissed 3/31/20

  • AR: Miller v. Thurston, No. 5:20-cv-05070 (W.D. Ark.), No. 20-2095 (8th Cir.)
    Signatures (e-signatures, threshold for initiatives)
    Complaint 4/22/20, PI granted in part 5/25/20 (no witnesses/notaries needed), rev’d 7/23/20

  • AR: Whitfield v. Thurston, No. 4:20-cv-00466 (E.D. Ark.)
    Signatures (deadline, threshold for candidates)
    Complaint 4/29/20, post-trial judgment for defense 6/24/20

  • AR: Baker v. Thurston, No. 60CV-20-3565 (Ark. Cir. Ct., Pulaski Cnty.)
    Mail (excuse)
    Complaint 6/23/20, dismissed 7/21/20

  • AR: League of Women Voters of Ark. v. Thurston, No. 5:20-cv-05174 (W.D. Ark.)
    Mail (notice/cure)
    Amd. complaint 9/28/20, PI denied 10/26/20

  • AR: Wince v. Thurston, No. 60CV-20-5928 (Ark. Cir. Ct., Pulaski Cnty.), Nos. 4:20-cv-01274, 4:20-cv-01278 (E.D. Ark.)
    Count (deadline to finish)
    Complaint 10/23/20, PI denied 10/28/20

  • AZ: Arizona v. Fontes, No. CV2020-003477 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Maricopa Cnty.)
    Mail (state law authority)
    Complaint 3/13/20, TRO granted 3/13/20, vol. dismissed 3/18/20

  • AZ: di Genova-Chang v. Ducey, No.4:20-cv-00141 (D. Ariz.)
    Signatures (compensation for COVID)
    Complaint 3/31/20, dismissed 7/7/20

  • AZ: Arizonans for Fair Elections v. Hobbs, No. 2:20-cv-00658 (D. Ariz.), No. 20-15719 (9th Cir.)
    Signatures (e-signatures, threshold for initiatives)
    Complaint 4/2/20, TRO denied and case dismissed 4/17/20, appeal vol. dismissed 5/19/20

  • AZ: Arizonans for Second Chances Rehabilitation & Safety et al. v. Hobbs, No.CV-20-0098-SA (Ariz. Sup. Ct.)
    Signatures (e-signatures, threshold for initiatives)
    Complaint 4/2/20, relief denied 5/13/20, opinion 9/4/20

  • AZ: Hoffard v. Cochise Cnty., No. 4:20-cv-00243 (D. Ariz.)
    Curbside voting
    Amd. complaint 8/27/20, PI denied 10/22/20

  • AZ: Ariz. Democratic Party v. Hobbs, No. 2:20-cv-01143 (D. Ariz.), Nos. 20-16759, 20-16766 (9th Cir.)
    Mail (cure for no signature)
    Complaint 6/10/20, injunction granted 9/10/20 (cure for missing signature), stay denied 9/18/20, stay granted 10/6/20

  • AZ: De La Fuente v. Hobbs, No. 2:20-cv-01276 (D. Ariz.)
    Signatures (threshold for candidate, filing fee)
    Complaint 6/29/20, vol. dismissed 10/2/20

  • AZ: Yazzie v. Hobbs, No. 3:20-cv-08222 (D. Ariz.), No. 20-16890 (9th Cir.)
    Mail (deadline)
    Complaint 8/26/20, PI denied 9/25/20, aff’d 10/15/20 

  • AZ: Arizona Public Integrity Alliance v. Fontes, No. LC2020-000252 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Maricopa Cnty.), 1 CA-CV 20-0458 (Ariz. Ct. App.), T-20-0003-CV, CV-20-0253-AP/EL (Ariz. Sup. Ct.)
    Mail (state law authority to correct ballot mistake)
    Complaint 8/25/20, PI denied 9/4/20, rev’d 9/10/20 (instruction for correcting mistake not permitted)

  • AZ: Fontes v. Arizona, No. CV2020-011845 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Maricopa Cnty.)
    Remote assistance in completing ballots for voters in long-term care and hospitals
    Complaint 9/25/20, decision 10/6/20

  • AZ: Mi Familia Vota v. Hobbs, No. 2:20-cv-01903 (D. Ariz.), No. 20-16932 (9th Cir.)
    Voter registration (deadline)
    Complaint 9/30/20, PI granted (deadline 10/23) 10/5/20, stay granted (deadline 10/15) 10/13/20

  • AZ: Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. Rodriguez, No. 4:20-cv-00432 (D. Ariz.)
    In-person (site on reservation)
    Complaint 10/12/20, PI denied 10/22/20

  • AZ: Ariz. Democratic Party v. Fontes, No. CV2020-012873 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Maricopa Cnty.)
    Mail (info on ballots rejected)
    Complaint 10/13/20, dismissed 10/22/20

  • AZ: Ariz. Democratic Party v. Rodriguez, No. C20204441 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Pima Cnty.)
    Mail (info on ballots rejected)
    Complaint 10/13/20, dismissed 10/22/20

  • CA: Election Integrity Project Cal. v. Lunn, No. 56-2020-00540781-CU-MC-VTA (Cal. Super. Ct., Ventura Cnty.)
    In-person (observer procedures)
    Complaint 3/4/20, TRO denied 3/6/20, PI denied 9/15/20

  • CA: Eilenberg v. City of Colton, No. 8:20-cv-00767 (C.D. Cal.)
    Signatures (deadline, threshold for initiative)
    Complaint 4/20/20, TRO denied 5/14/20
    Amd. complaint 6/4/20, PI denied 7/29/20, claims against State dismissed 10/13/20

  • CA: Cal. Republican Party v. Newsom, No. 34-2020-00277751 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento)
    Mail (declaratory judgment: do stay-at-home orders reach ballot collectors)
    Complaint 4/29/20, TRO denied 5/5/20, vol. dismissed 5/22/20

  • CA: Fugazi v. Padilla, No. 2:20-cv-00970 (E.D. Cal.)
    Postpone primary, mail (notice/cure date)
    Complaint 5/12/20, TRO denied 5/22/20
    Amd. complaint 6/30/20, dismissed 10/29/20

  • CA: Issa v. Newsom, No. 2:20-cv-01044 (E.D.Cal.)
    Mail (Elections Clause authority, state law authority, opportunity for fraud)
    Complaint 5/21/20, vol. dismissed 7/9/20

  • CA: RNC v. Newsom, No. 2:20-cv-01055 (E.D. Cal.)
    Mail (Elections Clause authority, opportunity for fraud, standards)
    Complaint 5/24/20, vol. dismissed

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Image

By FSJ 16/09/2025. The Housing and the Affordability issue: The architect said lets reason together as we build and design an energetic future with financially energized people; a discussion. By Mary Godwhen. Click here. BW Where would it go if I reverse engineer a "BAPE" shoe logo? Charles cares. He has vowed to have the most able and responsive Tiger economy in Europe and North America and the most safe and ably funded citizens in those regions; his citizens, his people. It is that we will be the economic winners; not losers; at the top and not the bottom...in front and not at the back. It would only take him a day to get it going. We can design anything. Certainly, anything we design demands and requires people with money for us to enjoy it; if it's a restaurant, an amusement park, a shopping centre or a town or city in general. The Bugatti sellers will have more sales and the Vauxhall owners will finally make full payment for the shopping and vacations; for their vehicles also. We do not enjoy suffering, lack or insufficiency. But maybe a vengeful bum might. Money is important. It has to be important. So, why are we incessantly brought to have this conversation about income support rather quite often when observing the economies west of Calais as run by; whom? Laissez Faire is not an economic policy but the policy of no policy in light of industrial mechanization of labor and the social problems it occasions when the families do not have enough money to buy their coal for heat, milk, bananas and vegetables. They would usually just take what they need; wherever they can take it. The economy is run by whom? The income support in Vermont, Minnesota and Massachusetts exceeds $70000.00 per year. This should be so for the whole, entire continent. But, some states and provinces, not all, are being run by income support benefit men touring boxes of undistributed emergency debit cards that they can now hand out to people in those camps. They seek public attention more than public efficacy. They have had enough time to solve the obvious. Money is the obvious issue but you wouldn't be waiting for an God fearing man to come and campaign on this issue when we know you can see the problem and solve it for us. We do not enjoy suffering, lack or insufficiency. But maybe a vengeful bum might. They are experimenting with money in terms of crypto or bit coin and its definition before they would agree to just HAVE MONEY. Money is the most important weapon in spite of all your Oppenheimer detonators that can't read help during peace time and for what when you would still need money?

Post a Comment