Republican National Committee v. Wetzel (Amicus)
What's at Stake
In 2020, in a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote, Mississippi joined eighteen other states in accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived after Election Day (in Mississippi’s case, up to five business days). This lawsuit by partisan actors seeks to disenfranchise these voters whose ballot is mailed by Election Day but—through no fault of their own—does not arrive until afterwards. In Mississippi, this harm will fall disproportionately on voters with disabilities, older voters, and other communities that rely upon absentee voting. Twisting the words and meaning of Congress, the RNC argues that three longstanding federal laws that set a uniform election day for federal races require that ballot may only be counted if they are received by election officials by Election Day. If accepted, this radical argument would not only disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of voters in Mississippi and eighteen other states, but also upend election administration in every state.
Summary
On January 26, 2024, the Republican National Committee, Mississippi Republican Party, and two individuals sued the Mississippi Secretary of State and several local election officials, seeking to overturn a four-year old Mississippi law that allows absentee voters to mail ballots up until Election Day and permits election officials to count those ballots so long as they are postmarked by Election Day and received within five business days after. Specifically, Plaintiffs argue that by accepting absentee ballots cast on or before Election Day but received after, Mississippi is “holding voting open beyond the federal Election Day,” which they claim “effectively extends Mississippi’s federal election past the Election Day established by Congress.” The district court consolidated this case with a similar challenge brought by the Libertarian Party of Mississippi.
On February 21, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Mississippi, Dechert LLP, and Disability Rights Mississippi filed a motion to intervene in the case to defend Mississippi’s law on behalf of their clients, Disability Rights Mississippi (DRMS) and League of Women Voters of Mississippi (the “League”). They did so to safeguard their members’ rights to vote and have that vote counted, and to protect their institutional interests in promoting democratic participation in Mississippi. Along with that motion, Proposed Intervenors attached a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint and end the case, showing why the Plaintiffs are wrong on the law and that they lack standing to bring the case because the law has only enfranchised voters and not injured them in any way. On March 7, 2024, the district court denied DRMS and the League’s motion to intervene, despite concluding that both organizations had “demonstrated an interest in this litigation sufficient to justify intervention” and “shown that their ability to protect their interests may be impaired by this lawsuit.” However, the court granted permission to file an amicus brief at the summary judgment stage.
On March 26, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Mississippi, Dechert LLP, and DRMS filed an amicus brief on behalf of DRMS and the League, in support of summary judgment for defendants. The brief focused on two adverse effects that would follow a ruling from in Plaintiffs’ favor. First, construing the Federal Election Day Statutes to require that all absentee ballots be received on or before Election Day would substantially increase the risk of disenfranchisement, and voters with disabilities—whose rights DRMS is authorized by law to defend—disproportionately rely on mail-in ballots and would bear the brunt of that disenfranchisement. Second, Plaintiffs’ misreading of federal law lacks a principled basis to distinguish between ballot receipt and other post-election acts of election officials—including the processing of absentee ballots, initial tabulation of votes, adjudication of challenged ballots, resolution of provisional ballots, county canvassing of local results, statewide canvassing of county results, and many steps in between. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ interpretation of the Federal Election Day Statutes would destabilize election administration not just in Mississippi but in every state, and it would lead to absurdities that strongly counsel against its adoption.
On July 28, 2024, the district court rejected Plaintiffs’ far-flung arguments and granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Although the court found that the political party plaintiffs had standing based on their diversion of resources, it concluded that Mississippi’s absentee ballot receipt deadline does not conflict with the federal election day statute. In reaching this conclusion, the court construed the term “election” to mean the “final selection” of an officer holder and rejected plaintiffs’ claim that ballots are not “cast” until received by election officials. Rather, “[a]ll that occurs after election day is the delivery and counting of ballots cast on or before election day.”
Plaintiffs then appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Fifth Circuit. On September 9, 2024, the ACLU, ACLU of Mississippi, Dechert LLP, and DRMS filed another amicus brief on behalf of DRMS and the League, in support of affirming the district court’s order. The amicus brief to the Circuit Court raises similar concerns to those presented before the district court.
Legal Documents
-
09/09/2024
Amici Curiae Brief of Disability Rights Mississippi and League of Women Voters of Mississippi in Support of Defendants-Appellees and Affirmance
Date Filed: 09/09/2024
Court: Appeals Court (5th Cir.)
Affiliate: Mississippi
-
07/28/2024
Order Granting Summary Judgment for Defendants -
03/26/2024
Amici Curiae Brief of Disability Rights Mississippi and League of Women Voters of Mississippi Supporting Defendants -
02/21/2024
Disability Rights Mississippi's and League of Women Voters of Mississippi's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss -
02/21/2024
Disability Rights Mississippi and League of Women Voters of Mississippi Motion to Intervene
Date Filed: 07/28/2024
Court: District Court (S.D. Miss.)
Affiliate: Mississippi
Date Filed: 03/26/2024
Court: District Court (S.D. Miss.)
Affiliate: Mississippi
Date Filed: 02/21/2024
Court: District Court (S.D. Miss.)
Affiliate: Mississippi
Date Filed: 02/21/2024
Court: District Court (S.D. Miss.)
Affiliate: Mississippi