Case: Daunt v. Benson

On November 6, 2018, Michigan voters approved Proposal 18-2, which amended the Michigan Constitution to create the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (“the Commission”). According to the constitutional amendment, the Commission would retain “exclusive authority to adopt district boundaries for the Michigan Senate, Michigan House of Representatives and U.S. Congress, every 10 years.”

On July 30, 2019, Michigan citizens filed this lawsuit against the Michigan Secretary of State pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excluding Michigan citizens from serving on the Commission if they had engaged in certain categories of constitutionally protected activity deemed to be partisan in nature. The plaintiffs alleged that the creation of this eligibility criteria violated free speech and political association principles protected by the First Amendment, as well as their right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. That same day, the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction to require the Michigan Secretary of State to cease implementation of all Michigan constitutional provisions that related to the Commission. This case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Janet T. Neff and Magistrate Judge Ellen S. Carmody. Magistrate Judge Sally J. Berens later replaced Judge Ellen S. Carmody.

On August 12, 2019, Count MI Vote (d/b/a/ “Voters not Politicians”), a non-profit corporation that sponsored Proposal 18-2 and drafted the constitutional amendment, moved to intervene as a defendant in the case. The district court granted the motion later that month, finding that, among other things, Voters not Politicians had a defense that shared a common question of law or fact with the main action. 2019 WL 12050350.

The following month, on September 11, 2019, the Michigan Secretary of State moved to consolidate this case with a similar action brought by the Michigan Republican Party (MRP) that challenged the constitutionality of the creation and administration of the Commission. The District Court granted the motion that same day, consolidating the two cases. 

On September 19, 2019, both Voters not Politicians and the Michigan Secretary of State moved to dismiss. On November 25, 2019, the district court issued an opinion denying the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. The court reasoned that such injunctions constitute “extraordinary” and “drastic” relief not justified in this case. 425 F.Supp.3d 856. 

The plaintiffs subsequently filed an interlocutory appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit regarding the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. On April 15, 2020, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment. First, the court found the eligibility criteria to be constitutional, finding, among other things, that Michigan had a compelling interest “in limiting the conflict of interest implicit in legislative control over redistricting.” Next, the court rejected MRP’s argument that the Michigan constitutional provision that required Commission applicants to self-identify as being affiliated with the Republican Party violated MRP’s freedom of association rights, partly because Commission applicants were prohibited from advocating for partisan ends. With respect to MRP’s claim that the Michigan constitutional amendment imposed a content-based regulation prohibiting political speech, the court found that “[a]lthough the provision does burden the commissioners’ freedom to speak openly about redistricting, this burden is outweighed by Michigan’s more-than-adequate justifications for limiting speech by commissioners on redistricting matters.” The court also found that MRP’s claim that the constitutional amendment favored applicants who did not identify with either major political party was unlikely to succeed on the merits, partly because a final decision of the Commission required a majority vote that included at least two commissioners who identified with each of the major political parties and at least two who did not. 956 F.3d 396. 

On July 6, 2020, the district court granted both Voters not Politicians’ and the Michigan Secretary of State’s motions to dismiss, agreeing with the court of appeals’ analysis regarding the constitutionality of the eligibility criteria. 2020 WL 8184334. The plaintiffs subsequently appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decision on May 27, 2021. While the court acknowledged that some of the partisan activities listed in the eligibility criteria were constitutionally protected, the court found that “Michigan’s compelling interest in cleansing its redistricting process of partisan influence justifies the limited burden that the [Michigan constitutional amendment] imposes.” 999 F.3d 299. 

This case is now closed.