[EL] Supreme Court reinstated ban on curbside voting in Alabama: 20A67, Merrill v. People First

[Fredric Woocher]

It's a shame Judge Barrett wasn't on the Court (yet), so the vote would at least have been 5-4.

Fredric D. Woocher
Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
10940 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2000
Los Angeles, CA 90024
fwoocher at strumwooch.com<mailto:fwoocher at strumwooch.com>
(310) 576-1233 x105

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Pursuant to the Governor's "Stay at Home" Order, Strumwasser & Woocher LLP is CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.  Packages requiring signatures will be returned undelivered - do not serve papers by this method.  While our office is closed, Strumwasser & Woocher LLP consents to electronic service in all of its matters.  Please serve by electronic mail to fwoocher at strumwooch.com AND to our Senior Legal Assistant, LaKeitha Oliver, at loliver at strumwooch.com<mailto:loliver at strumwooch.com>.  We reserve the right to object to any notice or delivery of any kind if not actually received by counsel before all statutory deadlines.



From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Scarberry
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 6:10 PM
To: Marty Lederman <Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu>; Vladeck, Stephen I <SVladeck at law.utexas.edu>
Cc: Rick Hasen <hasenr at gmail.com>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Supreme Court reinstated ban on curbside voting in Alabama: 20A67, Merrill v. People First

The order and dissent:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a67_3e04.pdf<https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a67_3e04.pdf>

Mark S. Scarberry
Professor of Law
Pepperdine University
Rick J. Caruso School of Law
________________________________
From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>> on behalf of Marty Lederman <Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu<mailto:Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 6:02:32 PM
To: Vladeck, Stephen I <SVladeck at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SVladeck at law.utexas.edu>>
Cc: Rick Hasen <hasenr at gmail.com<mailto:hasenr at gmail.com>>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: Re: [EL] Supreme Court reinstated ban on curbside voting in Alabama: 20A67, Merrill v. People First

In this case, I, for one, am thankful for the absence of an explanation, because whatever it is, it would set very troubling precedent.

If they stayed this, surely the result will be the same in Wisconsin (any day now) and North Carolina, where the effect on voting is more modest and where there are state statutes to which the majority will defer.  I only hope we get those cases over with very soon, not next week, so that voters and election workers are fully aware of the operative rules of the road and there's less chance of a decree close to or after 11/03 that certain submitted ballots not be counted.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 8:54 PM Vladeck, Stephen I <SVladeck at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SVladeck at law.utexas.edu>> wrote:

I'd just add the utter irresponsibility of providing not even a single sentence of explanation as to why the district court order, which even the Eleventh Circuit refused to stay, meets the criteria for a stay from the Court...



From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>> On Behalf Of Pamela S Karlan
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 8:48 PM
To: Rick Hasen <hasenr at gmail.com<mailto:hasenr at gmail.com>>
Cc: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: [EL] Supreme Court reinstated ban on curbside voting in Alabama: 20A67, Merrill v. People First



5-3, with the expected lineup.  A dissent from Justice Sotomayor that ends with a truly heartbreaking quotation:  " Plaintiff Howard Porter, Jr., a Black man in his seventies with asthma and Parkinson's Disease, told the District Court: " '[S]o many of my [ancestors] even died to vote. And while I don't mind dying to vote, I think we're past that - we're past that time.' " Id., at *11."



The total indifference of the Court to citizens' ability to vote - while the Court does its business remotely - is stunning.

Pamela S. Karlan

Kenneth and Harle Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law

Co-Director, Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic

Stanford Law School

559  Nathan Abbott Way

Stanford, CA 94305

karlan at stanford.edu<mailto:karlan at stanford.edu>

650.725.4851
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election<https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election>


--
Marty Lederman
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
202-662-9937

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection, security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit our website.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20201022/cfb1dddd/attachment.html>