Case: Smith v. Arkansas Board of Election Commissioners

On 23 December 2015, a former professional basketball player turned Arkansas politician filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas against: (i) the Arkansas Board of Election Commissioners, (ii) the Cross County Election Commission, (iii) the Crittenden County Election Commission and (iv) the Governor of the State of Arkansas, for alleged violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68), the Sherman Antitrust Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7) and the Voting Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1973).  For relief, the plaintiff sought compensatory damages in the sum of $300,000, punitive damages in the sum of $300,000, “exemplary and emotional damages” in the sum of $300,000 and attorneys’ fees.  The plaintiff was unrepresented and applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The case was assigned to District Judge James Maxwell Moody Jr.

This action is one of many lawsuits that the plaintiff has filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas arising out of the same set of circumstances in which he was removed from running as the Democratic Party candidate for State Representative, Arkansas House District 50 by order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court in 2012 (see the chart of cases in Docket No.3 in Smith v. Democratic Party of Arkansas et al. (3:16-cv-00068)).  The plaintiff has challenged that order (and related events) many times, claiming that the defendants and several other state government officials conspired to remove him from the ballot and ruin his good name.

Although the plaintiff was barred from running as the Democratic Party candidate for State Representative, Arkansas House District 50 in 2012, he went on to be nominated and certified as the Green Party candidate for State Representative, Arkansas House District 50.  Hudson Hallum was the Democratic party nominee for House District 50 on the general election ballot in 2012, but he pleaded guilty to election fraud in September, 2012, and the plaintiff filed suit to have Mr. Hallum removed from the ballot. In that lawsuit, the Pulaski County Circuit Court ordered that votes for Mr. Hallum in the general election not be counted or certified.  As a result, the plaintiff was the only eligible candidate on the ballot and was elected to the State House of Representatives to represent District 50 for the Green Party in the November, 2012, election.  The plaintiff took office and served his entire term as Representative.  During his term, he was known to generally caucus with the Democratic Party. In 2014, the plaintiff filed to run for re-election as Representative for District 50 in the Democratic Party primary, and the Secretary of State certified him as a candidate on the Democratic Party primary ballot. The plaintiff lost his reelection bid in a contested primary election.

On 8 November 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas granted the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, but dismissed the complaint with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and lack of standing. For the reasons stated in the Recommended Disposition of Magistrate Judge Beth Deere in Smith v. Arkansas Board of Election Commissioners et al. (3:16-cv-00068), the complaint was dismissed for lack of standing as the plaintiff had failed to establish that he had suffered any loss given that he was elected to District 50 representative in the 2012 general election for the Green Party.  Even if the plaintiff had suffered a loss, there was no means to redress it.  Moreover, neither the plaintiff nor the people of District 50 could legitimately claim to have suffered injury as a result of the plaintiff’s election as the Green Party candidate instead of the Democratic party candidate in circumstances where the plaintiff was not prevented from caucusing with the Democratic party after his 2012 election or from running in the 2014 Democratic primary for District 50 representative.  Accordingly, it was held that a favorable finding for the plaintiff would not redress the plaintiff’s alleged injuries, even if he had standing to pursue his case.  It was also held that the Arkansas Board of Election Commissioners and the Governor of Arkansas were immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment, and so the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims against them.  In addition to this the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas also held that the plaintiff had failed to state facts sufficient to support his RICO or Sherman Act claims, and so accordingly those claims were also dismissed.

In dismissing the action, James Maxwell Moody Jr. joined US. States District Judge D.P. Marshall, Jr. in cautioning the plaintiff to cease filing federal lawsuits about issues that either have been decided of that lack merit (see Docket No.3 in Smith v. Democratic Party of Arkansas et al. (3:16-cv-00068)).