This case centers on the deployment of drop boxes for voters in Ohio to deposit their absentee ballots after completing them. The Ohio Democratic Party and Lewis Goldfarb, a retired law professor, sued Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose in August to challenge LaRose’s directive that, although Ohio law allows the use of drop boxes, each county in the state can have only one drop box, which must be placed outside the county board of elections office. The challengers asked a state trial court to rule on whether Ohio law does in fact bar election officials from putting more than one drop box in each county. They noted that, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, as many as half of all voters are likely to use absentee ballots in the upcoming November elections. And they cited concerns that voters without cars could have trouble reaching a county’s lone drop box; even voters with cars, they added, might encounter long lines of traffic if there is just one drop box.
Judge Richard Frye ruled for the challengers on Sept. 15. Observing that the size of the state’s counties vary dramatically, in terms of both square miles and population, he concluded that LaRose acted “arbitrarily” in prohibiting election officials from installing additional drop boxes. He ruled that “every board of elections is legally permitted to consider enhancing safe and convenient delivery of absentee ballots and may tailor ballot drop box locations or conceivably other secure options to the needs of their individual county.”
LaRose appealed Frye’s decision; a state appeals court heard oral arguments on Sept. 25. A parallel lawsuit in federal court is on hold pending the state court’s decision.
The state’s intermediate appellate court ruled on Oct. 2 that although Ohio law does not require LaRose to limit drop boxes to one per county, the law also does not require him to allow more boxes. However, the court added, if LaRose wants to allow more boxes, he is free to do so. LaRose issued a directive on Oct. 5 to clarify that county elections boards could decide to install additional drop boxes outside their offices and to have employees outside the offices to collect absentee ballots. But under the directive, voters would still have to go to an elections board office — and only to an elections board office — to return their ballots.
Early voting began in Ohio on Oct. 6.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders|
|August 25, 2020||Complaint filed by Ohio Democratic Party, et al., in Ohio trial court|
|September 8, 2020||Response and motion to dismiss filed by Frank LaRose, secretary of state of Ohio|
|September 15, 2020||Opinion granting preliminary injunction of policy prohibiting more than one drop box per county|
|September 16, 2020||Notice of appeal to 10th District Ohio Court of Appeals filed by Frank LaRose|
|October 2, 2020||State appeals court decision overturning trial court injunction|
|October 5, 2020||Directive of Frank LaRose allowing installation of additional drop boxes solely outside elections board offices|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.