Case: Brakebill v. Jaeger

1:16-cv-00008 | U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota

Filed Date: Jan. 20, 2016

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case centers around an attempt to block enforcement of certain provisions in North Dakota’s voter ID laws adopted in 2016 and then amended in 2017.  The plaintiffs were six individuals, all of whom were members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, a native American tribe in North Dakota (the “Plaintiffs”).  The individuals were all residents of and qualified electors in North Dakota.  The defendant was Alvin Jaeger, the secretary of state of North Dakota, sued in his official c…

This case centers around an attempt to block enforcement of certain provisions in North Dakota’s voter ID laws adopted in 2016 and then amended in 2017.  The plaintiffs were six individuals, all of whom were members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, a native American tribe in North Dakota (the “Plaintiffs”).  The individuals were all residents of and qualified electors in North Dakota.  The defendant was Alvin Jaeger, the secretary of state of North Dakota, sued in his official capacity (the “Defendant” or the “Secretary”).  The Plaintiffs were able to obtain preliminary injunctions from the United States District Court of the District of North Dakota that prevented certain aspects of the laws being applied in the 2016 and 2018 elections but the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ultimately vacated the applicable injunction in 2019.

The Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief was filed on January 20, 2016.  The Plaintiffs sought a determination that the voter ID requirements in two North Dakota laws that made voter ID requirements more restricted, specifically HB 1332 and HB 1333, disproportionately burdened and disenfranchised Native Americans and: (a) had a discriminatory result in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. § 10301; (b) impose substantial and unjustified burdens on the fundamental right to vote in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; (c) deny qualified voters equal protection under the law in violation of the North Dakota Constitution; and (d) make ownership of a voter ID a pre­condition and qualification to vote in violation of the North Dakota Constitution.  As a result, the Plaintiffs asked the District Court to declare those portions of the laws unlawful and enjoin their enforcement.

Defendant moved to dismiss the Complaint.  The Court denied its motion, as well as a subsequent motion to reconsider.  On June 20, 2016, the Plaintiffs made a motion for a preliminary injunction.  Specifically, the motion for preliminary injunction sought to enjoin the Defendant from enforcing, during the pendency of the action, voter identification requirements enacted in HB 1332 and HB 1333 and order that Defendant conduct elections according to the laws and practices in force before the enactment of HB 1332 and HB 1333.

2016 Preliminary Injunction Order (2016 WL 7118548) - On August 1, 2016, the District Court entered an order granting the preliminary injunction requested by the Plaintiffs.  The Court considered the balance of harms and the public interest Dataphase factors and found that the right of voting-age Native Americans to cast a ballot outweighs any interest North Dakota may have in refusing to implement certain “fail-safe” provisions that would allow voters who did not have a qualifying identification card.  It noted that although most voters in North Dakota either possessed a qualifying identification card or could obtain some form of acceptable identification, a safety net was needed for those voters who could not obtain a qualifying ID with reasonable effort.

The court found that the record developed by the Plaintiffs was “thorough and unrefuted.”  Given the lack of any evidence presented by the Defendant to the contrary, the Court gave the findings of the studies and data presented by the Plaintiffs, considerable weight.  That undisputed evidence revealed that Native Americans face substantial and disproportionate burdens in obtaining each form of identification deemed acceptable under the new law. The Plaintiffs also presented evidence of disenfranchisement of voting-eligible Native Americans in the elections that have taken place since the amendments to N.D.C.C. § 16.1-05-07 in 2013 and 2015.

The Court found that this record distinguished the case from the Supreme Court’s plurality decision in Crawford upholding an Indiana voter identification law, which the Defendant relied on almost exclusively.  The Court noted that law was upheld  primarily because of a poorly developed record by the plaintiffs in that case.  In contrast, the Plaintiffs developed a very thorough record that clearly apprised the Court of the significant number of voting-age Native Americans who reside in North Dakota whom lack a qualifying voter identification under N.D.C.C. § 16.1-05-07.  The record was replete with concrete evidence of significant burdens imposed on Native American voters attempting to exercise their right to vote in North Dakota.  The Court found that the undisputed evidence in the record revealed that N.D.C.C. § 16.1- 05-07 imposed “excessively burdensome requirements” on Native American voters in North Dakota that far outweighed the interests put forth by the State of North Dakota.

The Court also noted that the Defendant did not offer any purported compelling state interest as to why North Dakota no longer provided any “fail-safe” mechanisms which would enable a person who could not produce a required voter ID to nevertheless be able to vote.  The Defendant failed to present any evidence showing that “fail-safe” provisions or provisional have resulted in voter fraud in the past, or are particularly susceptible to voter fraud in the future. The Court noted that, to the contrary, the record contained no evidence that voter fraud had ever been a problem in the state.. 

The Court held that no legal remedy other than enjoining the State of North Dakota from implementing N.D.C.C. § 16.1-05-07 without any “fail-safe” provisions will be sufficient to ensure Native Americans, and any other citizens struggling to comply with the new voter identification requirements, would have an opportunity to vote.  The Court noted that many states that have voter photo-identification requirements allow those who lack qualifying identification to vote by signing an affidavit or other statement or declaration to that effect and the Defendant never suggested the laws of those states fail to prevent fraud and promote voter confidence.  The Court held it was a minimal burden for the State to conduct the upcoming election in the same manner it successfully administered elections for decades before the enactment of the challenged voter identification law.

In response to the preliminary injunction and after the 2016 election, the North Dakota Legislative Assembly amended and enacted a new election law (HB 1369).  Effective July 1, 2017, the North Dakota law permitted individuals who did not present a valid ID when appearing to vote to mark a ballot that is then set aside until the individual’s qualifications as an elector can be verified.  See N.D.C.C. § 16.1-01-04.1(5).

The Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on December 27, 2017.  Shortly thereafter, the Defendant moved to dissolve the preliminary injunction.  In response, the Plaintiffs filed a response and a motion for a new preliminary injunction with respect to the new 2017 voter identification law.  The parties sought and were granted expedited review of the competing motions.

2018 Preliminary Injunction Order (2018 WL 1612190) - On April 3, 2018, the District Court entered an order that both dissolved the prior preliminary injunction and granted a new preliminary injunction against enforcement of the new 2017 voter identification law.  The Court held that the new law still required voters to have one of the very same forms of a qualifying ID’s in order to vote that was previously found to impose a discriminatory and burdensome impact on Native Americans.

 

The Court noted that the State never appealed the 2016 preliminary injunction order and, accordingly, it incorporated by reference the entirety of the facts and legal analysis set forth in that earlier order, all of which continue to be directly relevant to the Dataphase analysis of the new law.  The Court also noted the State’s acknowledgement that Native American communities often lack residential street addresses or do not have clear residential addresses while the prevents an individual who does not have a “current residential street address” from being qualified to vote.  The Court held that represents a clear “legal obstacle” inhibiting the opportunity to vote.  The Court held that the State could easily remedy this problem by simply eliminating the absolute need for a “current residential street address” and allowing for either a residential address, a mailing address (P.O. Box), or simply an address.

The Court also concluded that the “set aside” ballot process the State proclaims as a “fail-safe” measure will not help any voter who lacks the means to obtain a qualifying ID to cast a vote.  The Court further found that the new law was vague and unclear as to where and to whom a voter that voted by affidavit was to produce any documents to verify their eligibility to vote.

Ultimately, the Court held that the Dataphase factors, when viewed in their totality, weighed in favor of the issuance of a very limited preliminary injunction.  Specifically, the Secretary was enjoined from enforcing only certain subsections of N.D.C.C. § 16.1-0104.1 and only to the limited extent as follows:

(1) The Secretary was enjoined from enforcing Section 16.1-01-04.1(2)(b) which mandates the need for a “current residential street address” and required to allow a qualified voter to receive a ballot if they provide a valid form of ID as recognized in Section 16.1-01-04.1(3)(a) or another form of identification that includes either a “current residential street address” or a current mailing address (P.O. Box or other address) in North Dakota.

(2) The Secretary was enjoined from enforcing N.D.C.C. § 16.1-0104.1(3)(a)(2) which mandates only certain valid forms of identification and instead was required to allow and accept as a valid form of identification an official form of identification issued by a tribal government; the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), any other tribal agency or entity, or any other document, letter, writing, enrollment card, or other form of tribal identification issued by a tribal authority so long as those other forms of identification, (documents, letters, writings) set forth the tribal members name, date of birth, and current residential street address or mailing address.

(3) The Secretary was also required to allow and accept any documents issued by a tribal government, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), other tribal agencies or authorities, or any other document, letter, writing, enrollment card, or other forms of tribal identification which provide the missing or outdated information, i.e., name, current residential street address or mailing address, and date of birth.

Finally, the Secretary was required to launch a state-wide pre-election campaign to inform voters of the ID requirements. but the method of doing so was left to the discretion of the Secretary of State.

The Defendant appealed the District Court’s grant of a preliminary injunction to the Eighth Circuit.  

Eighth Circuit Opinion Vacating Preliminary Injunction (932 F.3d 671) - The Circuit Court panel concluded that the alleged burdens on voters did not justify a statewide injunction and they therefore vacated the District Court’s order granting a preliminary injunction and remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion.

First, the panel judged that the Plaintiffs’ facial challenge to the residential street address requirement would likely fail, and that the statewide injunction as to that provision could not be justified as a form of as-applied relief.  The panel held that the residential street address requirement furthers North Dakota’s legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence, and so unlike a poll tax, it was not invidiously “unrelated to voter qualifications.”

Second, the court also held that the fact that the residential street address requirement placed severe burdens on some Native Americans’ right to vote was not sufficient to justify a statewide injunction on that issue.  The panel held that the plaintiffs did not present evidence that the residential street address requirement imposes a substantial burden on most North Dakota voters, which is the relevant inquiry for a statewide injunction.  It noted that, even assuming that some communities do not have residential street addresses, that fact does not justify a statewide injunction that would prevent the Secretary from requiring a form of identification with a residential street address from the vast majority of residents who have them.

Third, the panel also concluded that the statute’s requirement to present an enumerated form of identification did not impose a burden on voters that justified a statewide injunction requiring acceptance of additional forms of identification.  The District Court’s findings do not address how many voters attempted to acquire the proper identification but were unable to do so with reasonable effort. The panel held that is the relevant question for assessing whether a voter is substantially burdened.  The panel found the evidence to be insufficient to show that the valid form of identification requirement places a substantial burden on most North Dakota voters and that the require was not invidious on its face.  As  a result, the panel held that an injunction that forbids the Secretary from enforcing the requirement statewide was not warranted.

Fourth, the panel also found the record to be insufficient to justify enjoining the Secretary from enforcing statewide the provisions of the statute that prescribed supplemental documents that could be provided.  The findings did not detail how many voters attempted to obtain a supplemental document and were unsuccessful.  The panel concluded that the findings therefore did not establish that the statute placed a substantial burden on most North Dakota voters, and a statewide injunction against the supplemental document requirement is unwarranted.

Finally, the panel indicated that the District Court’s ruling that the statute needed to provide more clarity on which official a voter would need to submit identification to after an election to substantiate an affidavit vote was not supported by evidence that any voter is unable to identify the appropriate election official to whom identification should be submitted after an election.  As a result, the panel held that there was an insufficient basis to enjoin the Defendant to offer formal clarification of the statute.

The panel observed that the District Court enjoined entirely the statutory requirements concerning a residential street address, valid form of identification, and supplemental documents.  If the District Court had instead required the plaintiffs to proceed with as-applied challenges based on their individual circumstances, then there may well have been time before the relevant election to consider whether narrower relief was justified.  The panel suggested that more limited relief could still be an option.

A dissent was filed by Judge Kelly.  The dissent noted that unrebutted evidence demonstrated that the North Dakota law would have a particularly devastating effect on eligible Native American voters, thousands of whom will effectively lose the right to vote.   The dissent further noted that North Dakota proffered no evidence to justify the law’s imposition. As a result, the dissent viewed the district court’s conclusion that the law likely runs afoul of the Equal Protection Clause as “eminently reasonable” and not an abuse of discretion. As a result, the dissent would have affirmed the district court’s order granting a preliminary injunction.

Following the appeal judgment, the case was returned to the District Court but no further proceedings appear to have occurred.

Summary Authors

Chris Newcomb (11/4/2022)

Chris Newcomb (11/4/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4305697/parties/brakebill-v-jaeger/


Attorney for Plaintiff

Bodo, Richard de (North Dakota)

Campbell, Matthew Lee (North Dakota)

Dickson, Thomas A. (North Dakota)

Leon, Jacqueline D. (North Dakota)

Lewerenz, Daniel David (North Dakota)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

1:16-cv-00008

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

Complaint
28

1:16-cv-00008

Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismisscument

April 5, 2016

April 5, 2016

Order/Opinion
50

1:16-cv-00008

Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Aug. 1, 2016

Aug. 1, 2016

Order/Opinion
77

1:16-cv-00008

First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

Complaint
99

1:16-cv-00008

Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion For Second Preliminary Injunction In Part

April 3, 2018

April 3, 2018

Order/Opinion
99

1:16-cv-00008

Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Second Preliminary Injunction In Part

April 3, 2018

April 3, 2018

Order/Opinion
123

1:16-cv-00008

18-01725

Judgment

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

July 31, 2019

July 31, 2019

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4305697/brakebill-v-jaeger/

Last updated Feb. 5, 2024, 3:12 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
9

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Lucille Vivier. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
8

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Ray Norquay. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
7

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Elvis Norquay. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
6

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Della Merrick. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
5

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Dorothy Herman. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
4

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Deloris Baker. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
3

NOTICE of Direct Assignment as to Richard Brakebill. Consent/Reassignment Form due by 2/3/2016. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
2

Summons Issued as to Alvin Jaeger. (rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

PACER
1

COMPLAINT against Alvin Jaeger (Filing fee $400, receipt number 116000489) filed by Deloris Baker, Dorothy Herman, Richard Brakebill, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Della Merrick, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rh) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

Jan. 20, 2016

Jan. 20, 2016

Clearinghouse
11

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Deloris Baker, Dorothy Herman, Richard Brakebill, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Della Merrick, Lucille Vivier. (Dickson, Thomas) (Entered: 01/22/2016)

Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

PACER
10

SUMMONS Returned Executed by Deloris Baker, Dorothy Herman, Richard Brakebill, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Della Merrick, Lucille Vivier. Alvin Jaeger served on 1/21/2016, answer due 2/11/2016 (Dickson, Thomas) (Entered: 01/22/2016)

Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

PACER
13

(Text Only) ORDER REASSIGNING CASE to Judge Daniel L. Hovland for all further proceedings by Chief Judge Ralph R. Erickson.(mk) (Entered: 01/29/2016)

Jan. 29, 2016

Jan. 29, 2016

PACER
12

CONSENT/REASSIGNMENT FORM by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay and Lucille Vivier. (mk) (Entered: 01/29/2016)

Jan. 29, 2016

Jan. 29, 2016

PACER
17

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 16 MEMORANDUM in Support (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 02/03/2016)

Feb. 3, 2016

Feb. 3, 2016

PACER
16

MEMORANDUM in Support re 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 02/03/2016)

Feb. 3, 2016

Feb. 3, 2016

PACER
15

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 02/03/2016)

Feb. 3, 2016

Feb. 3, 2016

PACER
14

MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Alvin Jaeger. (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 02/03/2016)

Feb. 3, 2016

Feb. 3, 2016

PACER
18

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 16 MEMORANDUM in Support, 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 02/24/2016)

Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

PACER
19

(Text Only) ORDER by Judge Daniel L. Hovland granting 18 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Plaintiffs' response due by 3/2/2016. (JM) (Entered: 02/25/2016)

Feb. 25, 2016

Feb. 25, 2016

PACER
21

RESPONSE to Motion re 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (as) (Entered: 03/03/2016)

March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

RECAP
20

*RESTRICTED - WRONG EVENT SELECTED* MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Opposition by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (de Bodo, Richard) Modified on 3/3/2016 to restrict access. (as) (Entered: 03/02/2016)

March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

PACER
22

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier re 21 Response to Motion to Dismiss (de Bodo, Richard) (Entered: 03/03/2016)

March 3, 2016

March 3, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 20 MOTION. Wrong event selected. Clerk's office restricted access to document, terminated motion and re-filed as RESPONSE to Motion at 21 . (as)

March 3, 2016

March 3, 2016

PACER
24

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 23 Reply to Response to Motion (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 03/09/2016)

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

PACER
23

REPLY to Response to Motion re 20 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Opposition, 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 03/09/2016)

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

PACER
25

MOTION for Leave to File by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Document)(mk) (Entered: 04/01/2016)

April 1, 2016

April 1, 2016

PACER
28

ORDER by Judge Daniel L. Hovland denying 14 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. (BS) (Entered: 04/05/2016)

April 5, 2016

April 5, 2016

Clearinghouse
27

BRIEF re 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Statement of Interest by United States of America. (Williamson, Victor) (Entered: 04/05/2016)

April 5, 2016

April 5, 2016

RECAP
26

(Text Only) ORDER by Judge Daniel L. Hovland granting 25 Motion for Leave to File. (BS) (Entered: 04/05/2016)

April 5, 2016

April 5, 2016

PACER
32

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 31 Answer to Complaint, 29 MOTION for Reconsideration, 30 MEMORANDUM in Support (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 04/08/2016)

April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

PACER
31

ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Alvin Jaeger.(Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 04/08/2016)

April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

PACER
30

MEMORANDUM in Support re 29 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 04/08/2016)

April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

PACER
29

MOTION for Reconsideration by Alvin Jaeger. (Joseph, Christopher) (Entered: 04/08/2016)

April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016

PACER
33

NOTICE of Hearing: Status Conference set for 4/20/2016 at 12:00 Noon (Central) by telephone before Judge Daniel L. Hovland. Chambers will initiate the call. (BS) (Entered: 04/14/2016)

April 14, 2016

April 14, 2016

PACER
34

RESPONSE to Motion re 29 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier, and Deloris Baker. (Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 4/20/2016 to add Deloris Baker as additional filer (js). (Entered: 04/19/2016)

April 19, 2016

April 19, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 34 (RESPONSE to Motion). Modified entry to add additional filer (Deloris Baker). (js)

April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

PACER
35

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Daniel L. Hovland: Status Conference held on 4/20/2016. (Court Reporter None) (jr) (Entered: 04/20/2016)

April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

PACER
36

ORDER by Judge Daniel L. Hovland denying 29 Motion for Reconsideration (BS) (Entered: 04/21/2016)

April 21, 2016

April 21, 2016

PACER
37

STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order re Preliminary Injunction Motion by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay. (de Bodo, Richard) (Entered: 05/10/2016)

May 10, 2016

May 10, 2016

PACER
38

NOTICE of Hearing: Status Conference set for 5/12/2016 at 01:30 PM Central by telephone before Judge Daniel L. Hovland. (BS) (Entered: 05/11/2016)

May 11, 2016

May 11, 2016

PACER
39

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Daniel L. Hovland: Status Conference held on 5/12/2016. (Court Reporter None) (jr) (Entered: 05/12/2016)

May 12, 2016

May 12, 2016

RECAP
40

STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order re Preliminary Injunction Motion by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay. (de Bodo, Richard) (Entered: 05/13/2016)

May 13, 2016

May 13, 2016

PACER
41

ORDER Adopting 40 Stipulation filed by Della Merrick, Richard Brakebill, Elvis Norquay, Dorothy Herman, Ray Norquay, Deloris Baker by Judge Daniel L. Hovland.(MM) (Entered: 05/17/2016)

May 17, 2016

May 17, 2016

RECAP
44

MEMORANDUM in Support re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Matthew Barreto, # 2 Declaration of Dan McCool, # 3 Declaration of Gerald Webster, # 4 Exhibit A of Webster Declaration, # 5 Appendix 1 of Webster Declaration, # 6 Appendix 2 of Webster Declaration, # 7 Declaration of Michael Herron, # 8 Declaration of Gabriel Sanchez, # 9 Declaration of Richard Brakebill, # 10 Declaration of Lucille Vivier, # 11 Declaration of Dorothy Herman, # 12 Declaration of LaDonna Allard, # 13 Declaration of Matthew Campbell)(as) (Entered: 06/21/2016)

1 Declaration of Matthew Barreto

View on PACER

2 Declaration of Dan McCool

View on RECAP

3 Declaration of Gerald Webster

View on PACER

4 Exhibit A of Webster Declaration

View on RECAP

5 Appendix 1 of Webster Declaration

View on PACER

6 Appendix 2 of Webster Declaration

View on PACER

7 Declaration of Michael Herron

View on RECAP

8 Declaration of Gabriel Sanchez

View on PACER

9 Declaration of Richard Brakebill

View on RECAP

10 Declaration of Lucille Vivier

View on RECAP

11 Declaration of Dorothy Herman

View on PACER

12 Declaration of LaDonna Allard

View on RECAP

13 Declaration of Matthew Campbell

View on PACER

June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

PACER
43

*RESTRICTED - WRONG EVENT SELECTED* MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Matthew Barreto, # 2 Declaration of Dan McCool, # 3 Declaration of Gerald Webster, # 4 Exhibit A of Webster Declaration, # 5 Appendix 1 of Webster Declaration, # 6 Appendix 2 of Webster Declaration, # 7 Declaration of Michael Herron, # 8 Declaration of Gabriel Sanchez, # 9 Declaration of Richard Brakebill, # 10 Declaration of Lucille Vivier, # 11 Declaration of Dorothy Herman, # 12 Declaration of LaDonna Allard, # 13 Declaration of Matthew Campbell)(Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 6/21/2016 to restrict access. (as) (Entered: 06/20/2016)

June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

PACER
42

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 06/20/2016)

June 20, 2016

June 20, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 43 MOTION. Wrong event selected. Clerk's office restricted access, terminated motion and re-filed as MEMORANDUM in Support at 44 . (as)

June 21, 2016

June 21, 2016

PACER
47

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 45 Response to Motion, 46 Notice of Substitution of Attorney (Fischer, Elizabeth) (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016

July 5, 2016

PACER
46

NOTICE of Substitution of Attorney by Elizabeth Ann Fischer on behalf of Alvin Jaeger (Fischer, Elizabeth) (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016

July 5, 2016

PACER
45

RESPONSE to Motion re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Fischer, Elizabeth) Modified on 7/6/2016 to remove incorrect link to 43 . (rh) (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016

July 5, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 45 Response to Motion. Clerk's office removed incorrect link to 43 . (rh)

July 6, 2016

July 6, 2016

PACER
48

REPLY to Response to Motion re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay. (de Bodo, Richard) (Entered: 07/18/2016)

July 18, 2016

July 18, 2016

PACER
49

NOTICE by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier of Recent Rulings Relevant to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Frank v. Walker, # 2 Exhibit B - Veasey v. Abbott)(Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 07/21/2016)

July 21, 2016

July 21, 2016

PACER
50

ORDER by Judge Daniel L. Hovland granting 42 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (RLB) Order MOOT - See ORDER At 99 . (as) (Entered: 08/01/2016)

Aug. 1, 2016

Aug. 1, 2016

Clearinghouse
51

NOTICE by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier of Submission of Proposed Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - 2012 Election Officials' Manual, # 2 Exhibit B - House Bill No. 1332, # 3 Exhibit C - Proposed Order)(Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 8/26/2016 to add descriptions to attachments (lh). (Entered: 08/24/2016)

Aug. 24, 2016

Aug. 24, 2016

PACER
54

OBJECTION re 51 Notice (Other), by Alvin Jaeger. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Defendant's [Proposed] Order Regarding Preliminary Injuction, # 2 Exhibit B - Affidavit, # 3 Exhibit C - Absentee Ballot Application with Affidavit)(js) (Entered: 08/29/2016)

Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 51 Notice. Clerk's office added descriptions to attachments. (lh)

Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

PACER
53

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 54 Notice (Other) (Fischer, Elizabeth) Modified on 8/29/2016 to correct link.(js). (Entered: 08/26/2016)

Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

PACER
52

*RESTRICTED - WRONG EVENT SELECTED* NOTICE by Alvin Jaeger of Objection to Proposed Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Fischer, Elizabeth) Modified on 8/29/2016 to restrict access. (js) (Entered: 08/26/2016)

Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

PACER
55

OBJECTION re 54 Objection to Defendant's Proposed Order by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 08/29/2016)

Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 52 (NOTICE). Wrong event selected. Clerks office restricted access to document and re-filed as (OBJECTION) at 54 ; 52 (NOTICE). Clerks office added more complete descriptions to attachments. (js)

Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

PACER
57

AFFIDAVIT of Alvin Jaeger re 56 Objection by Alvin Jaeger. (Fischer, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/31/2016)

Aug. 31, 2016

Aug. 31, 2016

PACER
56

OBJECTION Response by Alvin Jaeger. (Fischer, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/31/2016)

Aug. 31, 2016

Aug. 31, 2016

PACER
58

NOTICE of Appearance by Richard de Bodo on behalf of All Plaintiffs (de Bodo, Richard) (Entered: 09/15/2016)

Sept. 15, 2016

Sept. 15, 2016

PACER
59

NOTICE of Hearing: Status Conference set for 9/20/2016 at 01:15 PM by telephone before Judge Daniel L. Hovland. Parties are to call phone number and enter access code provided by separate email. (JM) (Entered: 09/16/2016)

Sept. 16, 2016

Sept. 16, 2016

PACER
62

ORDER Regarding Preliminary Injunction by Judge Daniel L. Hovland.(MM) (Entered: 09/20/2016)

Sept. 20, 2016

Sept. 20, 2016

PACER
61

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Daniel L. Hovland: Status Conference held on 9/20/2016. (Court Reporter SE) (jr) (Entered: 09/20/2016)

Sept. 20, 2016

Sept. 20, 2016

PACER
60

NOTICE by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier Regarding Status Conference (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 09/20/2016)

Sept. 20, 2016

Sept. 20, 2016

PACER
74

MOTION to Remove Deloris Baker as a named plaintiff by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (See Document 63 ) (rh) (Entered: 12/22/2017)

Dec. 13, 2017

Dec. 13, 2017

PACER
64

OBJECTION re 63 Motion for Leave to File, Motion to Withdraw as Attorney by Alvin Jaeger. (Fischer, Elizabeth) (Entered: 12/13/2017)

Dec. 13, 2017

Dec. 13, 2017

PACER
63

MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Proposed First Amended Complaint)(Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 12/14/2017 to add exhibit description. (js) (Entered: 12/13/2017)

Dec. 13, 2017

Dec. 13, 2017

PACER
65

ORDER: The court shall hold its ruling on motions at doc. no. 63 in abeyance pending defendant's response. By Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. (BG) (Entered: 12/14/2017)

Dec. 14, 2017

Dec. 14, 2017

RECAP
69

NOTICE of Appearance by Jacqueline D. De Leon on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (js) (Entered: 12/18/2017)

Dec. 15, 2017

Dec. 15, 2017

PACER
68

NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel David Lewerenz on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (js) (Entered: 12/18/2017)

Dec. 15, 2017

Dec. 15, 2017

PACER
67

*RESTRICTED - ERROR IN DOCUMENT* NOTICE of Appearance by Jacqueline D. De Leon on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (De Leon, Jacqueline) Modified on 12/18/2017 to restrict access. (js) (Entered: 12/15/2017)

Dec. 15, 2017

Dec. 15, 2017

PACER
66

*RESTRICTED - ERROR IN DOCUMENT* NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel David Lewerenz on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Lewerenz, Daniel) Modified on 12/18/2017 to restrict access. (js) (Entered: 12/15/2017)

Dec. 15, 2017

Dec. 15, 2017

RECAP

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 66 NOTICE of Appearance. Document filed was a fillable pdf. Clerk's Office restricted access to document and re-filed as a non-fillable pdf at docket 68 ; 67 NOTICE of Appearance. Document filed was a fillable pdf. Clerk's Office restricted access to document and re-filed as a non-fillable pdf at docket 69 . (js)

Dec. 18, 2017

Dec. 18, 2017

PACER
72

*RESTRICTED - ERROR IN DOCUMENT* MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer to Amended Complaint by Alvin Jaeger. (Nicolai, James) Modified on 12/22/2017 to restrict access to document per filer's request. (rh) (Entered: 12/21/2017)

Dec. 21, 2017

Dec. 21, 2017

PACER
71

RESPONSE to Motion re 63 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended ComplaintMOTION to Withdraw as Attorney 74 Motion and Drop Ms. Baker from the Matter filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Nicolai, James) Modified on 12/28/2017 to add link (lh). (Entered: 12/21/2017)

Dec. 21, 2017

Dec. 21, 2017

RECAP
70

NOTICE of Appearance by James E. Nicolai on behalf of Alvin Jaeger (Nicolai, James) (Entered: 12/21/2017)

Dec. 21, 2017

Dec. 21, 2017

PACER
75

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr granting 63 Motion for Leave to File; granting 73 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint due by 12/29/2017. Defendant Alvin Jaeger's answer due 1/31/2018. (ZE) (Entered: 12/22/2017)

Dec. 22, 2017

Dec. 22, 2017

PACER
73

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 63 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended ComplaintMOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Alvin Jaeger. (Nicolai, James) (Entered: 12/22/2017)

Dec. 22, 2017

Dec. 22, 2017

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 17 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer. Error in document. Clerk's office restricted access to document per filer's request. (rh)

Dec. 22, 2017

Dec. 22, 2017

PACER
78

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Deloris Baker, Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier re 77 Amended Complaint (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 12/27/2017)

Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

PACER
77

AMENDED COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against All Defendants filed by Deloris Baker, Dorothy Herman, Richard Brakebill, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Della Merrick, Lucille Vivier.(Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 12/27/2017)

Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

Clearinghouse
76

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier re 63 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended ComplaintMOTION to Withdraw as Attorney (Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 12/27/2017)

Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

PACER
79

REPLY to Response to Motion re 63 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint and 74 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 12/29/2017 to add link (lh). (Entered: 12/28/2017)

Dec. 28, 2017

Dec. 28, 2017

PACER
85

SUPPLEMENT to document: 81 MEMORANDUM in Support by Alvin Jaeger. Exhibits S10-S15 filed conventionally in Clerk's office. (cd) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

RECAP
84

(Text Only) ORDER by Chief Judge Daniel L. Hovland granting 82 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. (JM) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

PACER
83

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Alvin Jaeger re 81 MEMORANDUM in Support,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (Nicolai, James) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

PACER
82

MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by Alvin Jaeger. (Nicolai, James) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

PACER
81

MEMORANDUM in Support re 80 MOTION Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Alvin Jaeger. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of John Arnold, # 2 Exhibit A1 - Voting Ballot, # 3 Exhibit A2 - Voting Ballot, # 4 Exhibit A3 - Voting Ballot, # 5 Exhibit A4 - Voting Ballot, # 6 Exhibit A5 - Voting Ballot, # 7 Exhibit A6 - Voting Ballot, # 8 Exhibit A7 - Voting Ballot, # 9 Exhibit A8 - Voting Ballot, # 10 Exhibit A9 - Voting Ballot, # 11 Exhibit A10 - Voting Ballot, # 12 Exhibit A11 - Voting Ballot, # 13 Exhibit A12 - Voting Ballot, # 14 Exhibit A13 - Voting Ballot, # 15 Exhibit A14 - Voting Ballot, # 16 Exhibit A15 - Voting Ballot, # 17 Exhibit A16 - Voting Ballot, # 18 Exhibit A17 - Voting Ballot, # 19 Exhibit A18 - Voting Ballot, # 20 Exhibit A19 - Voting Ballot, # 21 Exhibit A20 - Voting Ballot, # 22 Exhibit A21 - Voting Ballot, # 23 Exhibit A22 - Voting Ballot, # 24 Exhibit A23 - Voting Ballot, # 25 Exhibit A24 - Voting Ballot, # 26 Exhibit A25 - Voting Ballot, # 27 Exhibit A26 - Voting Ballot, # 28 Exhibit A27 - Voting Ballot, # 29 Exhibit A28 - Voting Ballot, # 30 Exhibit A29 - Voting Ballot, # 31 Exhibit A30 - Voting Ballot, # 32 Exhibit A31 - Voting Ballot, # 33 Exhibit A32 - Voting Ballot, # 34 Exhibit A33 - Voting Ballot, # 35 Exhibit A34 - Voting Ballot, # 36 Exhibit A35 - Voting Ballot, # 37 Exhibit A36 - Voting Ballot, # 38 Exhibit A37 - Voting Ballot, # 39 Exhibit A38 - Voting Ballot, # 40 Exhibit A39 - Voting Ballot, # 41 Exhibit A40 - Voting Ballot, # 42 Exhibit A41 - Voting Ballot, # 43 Exhibit A42 - Voting Ballot, # 44 Exhibit A43 - Voting Ballot, # 45 Exhibit A44 - Voting Ballot, # 46 Exhibit A45 - Voting Ballot, # 47 Exhibit A46 - Voting Ballot, # 48 Exhibit A47 - Voting Ballot, # 49 Exhibit A48 - Voting Ballot, # 50 Exhibit A49 - Voting Ballot, # 51 Exhibit A50 - Voting Ballot, # 52 Exhibit A51 - Voting Ballot, # 53 Exhibit A52 - Voting Ballot, # 54 Exhibit A53 - Voting Ballot, # 55 Affidavit of Irwin James Narum (Jim) Silrum, # 56 Exhibit S1 - Official Abstract of Votes, # 57 Exhibit S2 - North Dakota Demographics Conference, # 58 Exhibit S3 - Voter ID Sign, # 59 Exhibit S4 - Voter ID Sign, # 60 Exhibit S5 - Voter ID Sign, # 61 Exhibit S6 - Voter ID Sign, # 62 Exhibit S7 - Voter ID Sign, # 63 Exhibit S8 - Voter ID Sign, # 64 Exhibit S9 - Voter ID Sign, # 65 Exhibit S16 - Voter's Affidavit, # 66 Exhibit S17 - Absentee/Mail Ballot, # 67 Exhibit S18 - Voter Information, # 68 Exhibit S19 - Voter Information, # 69 Exhibit S20 - Letter to Voter, # 70 Affidavit of Melissa Hamilton, # 71 Exhibit H1 - Application for ND Driver's License) (Nicolai, James) Modified on 1/17/2018 to delete excess docket text and add exhibit numbering. (cd) Modified on 1/22/2018 to add exhibit descriptions. (cd) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

PACER
80

MOTION to Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Alvin Jaeger. (Nicolai, James) (Entered: 01/16/2018)

Jan. 16, 2018

Jan. 16, 2018

PACER

DOCKET CORRECTION re: 81 Memorandum in Support of Motion. Clerk's office added numbers to exhibits and deleted duplicate word "exhibit" from each attachment. (cd)

Jan. 17, 2018

Jan. 17, 2018

PACER
86

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 80 MOTION to Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Motion for Consolidated Briefing Schedule by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Order)(Campbell, Matthew) (Entered: 01/23/2018)

Jan. 23, 2018

Jan. 23, 2018

PACER

Set/Reset Deadlines as to 80 MOTION to Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction . Responses due by 2/16/2018 Replies due by 3/9/2018. (cjs)

Jan. 29, 2018

Jan. 29, 2018

PACER
87

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr granting 86 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply (ZE) (Entered: 01/29/2018)

Jan. 29, 2018

Jan. 29, 2018

PACER
88

ANSWER to 77 Amended Complaint by Alvin Jaeger.(Nicolai, James) (Entered: 01/31/2018)

Jan. 31, 2018

Jan. 31, 2018

PACER
93

RESPONSE to Motion re 80 MOTION to Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiffs. (See Response contained in doc 89 (td) (Entered: 02/26/2018)

Feb. 16, 2018

Feb. 16, 2018

PACER
90

MEMORANDUM in Support re 80 MOTION to Dissolve preliminary injunction re 50 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 89 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Response to Defendant's Motion to Dissolve Preliminary Injunction filed by Richard Brakebill, Dorothy Herman, Della Merrick, Elvis Norquay, Ray Norquay, Lucille Vivier. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Matthew Barreto, Ph.D. with Exh A-D, # 2 Declaration of Gabriel R. Sanchez Ph.D, # 3Declaration of Michael D. Herron, # 4 Written Testimony Native American Rights Fund March 17, 2017, # 5 Declaration of Standing Rock Chairman Mike Faith, # 6 Declaration of Standing Rock Chairwoman Myra Pearson, # 7 Jim Silrum e-mail 1/18/2017, # 8 Declaration of Louis Frederick, Director of LIHEAP, # 9 Addendum to Declaration of Daniel McCool, Ph.D., # 10Declaration of Dr. Gerald R. Webster, # 11 Declaration of Lucille Viver, # 12 Declaration of Carol Davis, # 13 Declaration of Elvis Norquay, # 14 Declaration of Richard Brakebill, # 15 Strategic Plan - End Homelessness Feb, 2008., # 16 Jim Silrum e-mail 2/3/17 (Campbell, Matthew) Modified on 2/27/2018: SEE CORRECTED Memorandum filed at 92 (lh). Modified on 2/27/2018 to add descriptions to the attachments (td). (Entered: 02/16/2018)

Feb. 16, 2018

Feb. 16, 2018

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: North Dakota

Case Type(s):

Election/Voting Rights

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 20, 2016

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Six individuals, all of whom were members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, a native American tribe in North Dakota

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State of North Dakota, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Voting Rights Act, section 2, 52 U.S.C. § 10301 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 1973)

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Non-settlement Outcome

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Declaratory Judgment

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Issues

Voting:

Voter ID

Race:

American Indian/Alaskan Native