Filed Date: Oct. 26, 2020
Closed Date: May 26, 2021
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case is about a voter's erroneous placement on a list of convicted felons, which excluded her from voting in Iowa.
In this case, an Iowa voter was erroneously placed on a list of convicted felons and excluded from voting, even though she had not been convicted of a felony. The plaintiff alleged that she voted “as usual” in November 2018, and a few weeks later received a letter informing her that her vote had been rejected.
On October 26, 2020, she sued the Iowa Secretary of State and Polk County Auditor in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa in their individual and professional capacities. Represented by local private attorneys, the plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney’s fees and costs. Plaintiff alleged two constitutional torts in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against both defendants. First, she alleged that the defendants deprived or denied her of the right to vote by falsely placing her name on a list of disqualified voters. Plaintiff claimed the defendants knew that citizens were being denied their right to vote and that the systems in place to verify and/or correct mistaken placement of citizens on the felon exclusion list were inadequate. Second, she alleged the defendants denied her procedural due process by not notifying her that her name had been placed on the felony exclusion list so that she could have challenged the error.
In response, on December 23 and 28, both defendants (the Auditor and the Secretary of State respectively) filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. In their motions to dismiss, both defendants argued that the plaintiff did not allege anything they had personally done to cause the plaintiff harm. Both defendants also argued that the due process claim was implausible, including because the plaintiff received notice when her registration was canceled, and because the only way her vote could have been rejected is if she voted provisionally and thus was notified of the procedure to challenge the deficiency in her voter registration. The Auditor claimed he was not responsible for verifying the accuracy of the disqualification list his office received. The Auditor also argued he could not be held liable for the actions of his office and employees because the doctrine of respondeat superior does not apply to section 1983 claims. The Secretary of State asserted he was not responsible for conducting an election. The Secretary of State also sought (a) qualified immunity for the claims asserted in his individual capacity because his actions were not violations of constitutional law, (b) sovereign immunity for any claims against him in his official capacity (although the plaintiff disclaimed that she had pled any official capacity claims). The Secretary alternatively requested permission to file an interlocutory appeal if the Court denied his motion to dismiss.
On May 25, 2021, the Court granted both defendants’ motions to dismiss, finding the plaintiff had failed to state a plausible claim. First, the Court reframed the right at issue – narrowing it from the broad “right to vote,” as asserted by the plaintiff, to “the right to be free from errors in the transmission of voter-disqualifying information.” The Court assumed, without deciding, that this right was constitutionally or legally protected. The Court then concluded the plaintiff failed to state a claim because section 1983 requires intentional conduct, whereas the plaintiff’s allegations amounted to mere negligence. The Court alternatively concluded the Secretary of State was entitled to qualified immunity because neither the plaintiff nor the Court had identified a decision showing the conduct at issue violated a clearly established right.
The Court entered final judgment in favor of the defendants on May 26, 2021. No appeal was taken.
Summary Authors
Jamie Isani (3/14/2024)
Jamie Isani (4/2/2024)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18573267/bensley-v-pate/
Last updated March 14, 2024, 5:39 p.m.
State / Territory: Iowa
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Oct. 26, 2020
Closing Date: May 26, 2021
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Individual voter
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Iowa Secretary of State, State
Polk County Auditor (Polk), County
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Defendant
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Amount Defendant Pays: $0
Issues
Voting: