NAACP, With Dechert as Counsel, Files Lawsuit Seeking Voting Protections in Pennsylvania
The suit seeks an injunction to have state election officials increase the number of polling places, provide more notice if polling places are going to be consolidated, expanded early vote and make changes to the mail-in ballot deadlines, among other things.
June 18, 2020 at 05:46 PM
3 minute read
Backed by Big Law's Dechert, the Pennsylvania chapter of the NAACP has sued state election officials in an effort to bar the state from undertaking voting practices as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic that could disproportionately affect—and possibly disenfranchise—minority voters.
The suit, captioned NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference v. Boockvar, was filed in the Commonwealth Court on Thursday.
The petition cites long lines, overcrowding and confusion that occurred during the June primary as state officials grappled with ways to hold an election while in the throws of a global pandemic. The suit seeks an injunction to have state election officials increase the number of polling places, provide more notice if polling places are going to be consolidated, expanded early vote and make changes to the mail-in ballot deadlines, among other things.
"The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy," Kenneth Huston, president of the NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference said in a statement. "We will not allow the current unequal and unsafe voting conditions in Pennsylvania to stand. It is time for court intervention to ensure that our election this November will be safe, free, and fair and that the right to vote of all Pennsylvanians will be protected."
READ THE COMPLAINT:
|Leading Dechert's team in the case is Sozi Pedro Tulante and Neil Steiner, with Julia Chapman, Tiffany Engsell and Craig Castiglia as the associates on the case. Along with Dechert, attorneys from Free Speech for People, including Ronald Fein and John Bonifaz, are also representing the NAACP.
According to the 72-page petition, steps that state officials took during the primary election earlier this month left some Pennsylvania's confused and led others to face the option of either facing increased health risks or not voting. Specifically, the petition argued that consolidating polling places was done with little notice and caused overcrowding at some polling spots, and deficiencies in the process for mail-in ballots caused difficulties in timely processing the ballots, leading to voter confusion.
The petition also contended that the changes—especially the consolidation of polling places, which were only advertised at the county board of elections offices and online—disproportionately affected those without internet access and those who rely on public transportation, the use of which can greatly increase the health risks involved in voting.
"In both cases, African American or Latino voters are most likely to be impacted. Thus, while some voters can vote burden-free, African American and Latino voters are more likely to face an unacceptable and unnecessary risk to their lives and health," the petition said.
The petition also noted the toll COVID-19 has taken so far, and cited public health experts' predictions that there will be a second wave of infection in the fall. The court, the petition said, should step in now to prevent similar problems from arising in the November general election.
"In short, the current voting regime needlessly permitted the crisis to disenfranchise the voting rights of Pennsylvanians during the Primary Election. Absent judicial intervention, there is no reason to believe things will be different in the fall," the petition said. "Now is the time to address the problems of voting in a pandemic that manifested in the Pennsylvania Primary Election and in the weeks and months that follow."
The Secretary of the Commonwealth's office did not return a message seeking comment.
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 AllAppeals Court Rules Pittsburgh School District Immune to Suit Over Sex Abuse of Disabled Student
4 minute readPa. Court Denies Procedurally Deficient Request for Delay Damages in $4.1M Personal Injury Verdict
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
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