Court Hears Arguments on Absentee Voting Deadline
The Commonwealth Court heard its first arguments June 5 in a constitutional challenge to Pennsylvania's absentee voting deadline, considering defense motions to dismiss parts of the lawsuit filed by nine voters who said that in November 2018, they were unable to return completed ballots in advance of the deadline, the Friday before the election.
June 07, 2019 at 01:00 PM
2 minute read
The Commonwealth Court heard its first arguments June 5 in a constitutional challenge to Pennsylvania's absentee voting deadline, considering defense motions to dismiss parts of the lawsuit filed by nine voters who said that in November 2018, they were unable to return completed ballots in advance of the deadline, the Friday before the election.
Named as defendants in the case were legislative leaders, Gov. Tom Wolf and Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar.
“We are pleased that the court today is carefully considering our challenge to the Pennsylvania early ballot return deadline, which is the earliest in the country by a wide margin,” said John Powers, counsel in the Voting Rights Project of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
Plaintiffs in the case said they submitted their application for an absentee ballot by the application deadline, which is the Tuesday before the election, but received their ballots after or too close to the deadline for submitting the completed ballot. The lawsuit asks the court to overturn the unreasonably early deadline for returning absentee ballots because it is a violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution's guarantees of “free and equal” elections and equal protection under the law.
Pennsylvania is one of only three states in the country that does not allow voters to submit absentee ballots up to Election Day, according to the Lawyers' Committee.
“In every election, thousands of absentee ballots are not counted in Pennsylvania, through no fault of the voter,” said Molly Tack-Hooper, senior staff attorney with the ACLU of Pennsylvania, which is also representing the plaintiffs. “Our laws should make it easier to vote, not harder.”
The plaintiffs also are represented by the Public Interest Law Center and volunteer attorneys from the law firm Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.
The Simpson Thacher team includes litigation partner Bill Russell, pro bono counsel Harlene Katzman and litigation associates Shannon McGovern, Daniel Owsley, Stephanie Hon and Alexia Syrmos.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPa. Federal District Courts Reach Full Complement Following Latest Confirmation
Federal Judge Hits US With $227,000 Sanction for Discovery Misconduct
3 minute readPa. Supreme Court Taps New Philadelphia Family Division Administrative Judge
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1When Dealing With Child Abuse Cases, Attorneys Need to Know How Children Perceive Time
- 2Like a Life Raft: Ben Brafman Reflects on Nearly 50 Years as a Defense Attorney
- 3HSF Partner Removed Over ‘Deeply Offensive’ Tweets
- 4Another Latham Partner Heads to Sidley in London
- 5In 'Kousisis,' the DOJ Once Again Pushes the Limits of Federal Fraud Prosecutions
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250