Filed Date: Nov. 14, 2016
Closed Date: Jan. 26, 2017
Clearinghouse coding complete
On November 14, 2016, Plaintiff, an individual voter, filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in the Central District of California. Plaintiff alleged that due to the wide margin between popular votes received by Hillary Clinton and by President-Elect Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential election, the value of each Clinton vote counted as approximately 0.99 of each Trump vote. Plaintiff stated that under the Fifth Amendment, citizens have a fundamental right to have their votes counted equally. Plaintiff alleged that counting each Clinton vote as 0.99 is unfair and serves no legitimate government interest. Plaintiff further alleged that the Electoral College Members' declaration of a winner in accordance with the states' results violated Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment rights. Plaintiff also contended that the Electoral College Members’ anticipated action of declaring Trump the winner violates the Baker v. Carr rule of "one person, one vote."
Plaintiff sought a judicial declaration that the Electoral College Members’ anticipated action will substantially, adversely, and irreparably injure Plaintiff and other Clinton voters. Plaintiff also sought a judicial declaration that the process followed by the Electoral College Members is irreconcilable with Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment right to equal protection. Lastly, Plaintiff sought an order permanently enjoining the Electoral College Members from casting votes in a manner inconsistent with Hillary Clinton receiving more votes.
On November 17, 2016, the Central District of California denied the Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis due to an inadequate showing of indigency and because the case was legally or factually frivolous. The Central District dismissed the case.
On November 18, 2016, Plaintiff filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (docket no. 16-56754).
On January 23, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for voluntary dismissal, which was granted two days later.
Summary Authors
Ann Postolowski (6/30/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6184886/parties/john-s-birke-v-the-538-individual-members-of-the-electoral-college/
Real, Manuel Lawrence (California)
Birke, John S. (California)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6184886/john-s-birke-v-the-538-individual-members-of-the-electoral-college/
Last updated Oct. 7, 2025, 4:10 a.m.
State / Territory: California
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: Nov. 14, 2016
Closing Date: Jan. 26, 2017
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Plaintiff is a resident of California who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential election.
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
The 538 Individual Members of the Electoral College, Federal
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Voting Rights Act, unspecified, 52 U.S.C. § 10301 et seq (previously 42 U.S.C § 1973 et seq.)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Defendant
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Amount Defendant Pays: N/A
Issues
Voting: