Case: Alliance Party v. Virginia State Board of Elections

1:20-cv-00774 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

Filed Date: July 9, 2020

Closed Date: April 20, 2021

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On July 9, 2020, the Alliance Party and its 2020 presidential candidate (the Alliance Party), filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against the Virginia Board of Elections, where it was assigned to District Judge Liam O'Grady and Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis. The Alliance Party, represented by private counsel, challenged Virginia’s in-person signature collection and witnessing requirements for the November 2020 general election as they pertained to…

On July 9, 2020, the Alliance Party and its 2020 presidential candidate (the Alliance Party), filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against the Virginia Board of Elections, where it was assigned to District Judge Liam O'Grady and Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis. The Alliance Party, represented by private counsel, challenged Virginia’s in-person signature collection and witnessing requirements for the November 2020 general election as they pertained to third-party candidates. Specifically, the Alliance Party claimed that the Governor of Virginia's emergency orders and COVID-19 safety requirements made the in-person collection of signatures on election petitions unlawful, functionally impossible, and highly disadvantageous to third-party candidates.

The Alliance Party sought declaratory and injunctive relief regarding these signature requirements, alleging that they imposed a severe restriction on rights guaranteed under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to both third-party candidates and voters. Specifically, the Alliance Party requested a lesser signature requirement for third parties seeking to appear on the election ballot, or, in the alternative, the party sought an elimination of the signature requirement and the imposition of a filing fee to appear on the ballot. 

Judge O'Grady ordered the Alliance Party in October 2020 to explain why the case should not be dismissed despite the Alliance Party's failure to serve the defendant with notice of the suit. Several months later, on April 20, 2021, Judge O'Grady dismissed the action without prejudice following the Alliance Party's failure to respond to his October 2020 order.

Summary Authors

Betsy Sheppard (3/19/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18443386/parties/alliance-party-v-virginia-state-board-of-elections/


Judge(s)

Davis, Ivan D. (Virginia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barlow, Benjamin S. (District of Columbia)

Dunlap, Thomas M. (Virginia)

Rossi, Paul A. (Pennsylvania)

Judge(s)

Davis, Ivan D. (Virginia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barlow, Benjamin S. (District of Columbia)

Dunlap, Thomas M. (Virginia)

Rossi, Paul A. (Pennsylvania)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Oct. 14, 2020 Docket
1

Plaintiffs' Civil Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

July 9, 2020 Complaint
5

Order

April 20, 2021 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Alliance Party v. Va. State Bd. of Elections

Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project

Third party and its candidate for president sued Virginia Board of Elections seeking to modify in-person signature collection requirements in light of COVID-19. Also seek to modify the requirement th… Sept. 1, 2020 https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=139

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18443386/alliance-party-v-virginia-state-board-of-elections/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0422-7293216.), filed by Alliance Party, Roque De La Fuente. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Dunlap, Thomas) (Entered: 07/09/2020)

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

2 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

July 9, 2020 Clearinghouse
2

Proposed Summons re 1 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief by Alliance Party, Roque De La Fuente. (Dunlap, Thomas) (Entered: 07/09/2020)

July 9, 2020 PACER

Initial Case Assignment to District Judge Liam O'Grady and Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis. (lcre, )

July 10, 2020 PACER
3

Summons Issued as to Jessica Bowman, Robert H. Brink, Roque De La Fuente, Jamilah D. Lecruise, John O'Bannon, Virginia State Board of Elections. NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Print out two electronically issued summons and one copy of the attachments for each defendant to be served with the complaint. (Attachments: # 1 Notice)(lcre, ) (Entered: 07/10/2020)

July 10, 2020 PACER
4

ORDERED that the within twenty (20) days of the date of entry of his Order, Plaintiffs show cause, if any they can, why this matter should not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4m of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 10/14/2020. (lcre, ) (Entered: 10/14/2020)

Oct. 14, 2020 PACER
5

ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to F. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 4/20/2021. (lber) (Entered: 04/20/2021)

April 20, 2021 Clearinghouse
5

ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to F. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 4/20/2021. (lber) (Entered: 04/20/2021)

April 20, 2021 RECAP

State / Territory: Virginia

Case Type(s):

Election/Voting Rights

Special Collection(s):

COVID-19 (novel coronavirus)

Healthy Elections COVID litigation tracker

Key Dates

Filing Date: July 9, 2020

Closing Date: April 20, 2021

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

An independent political party and its 2020 presidential candidate

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Virginia Board of Elections, State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Freedom of speech/association

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Voting

Voting:

Candidate qualifications

Election administration