Case: Segovia v. Board of Election Commissioners

1:15-cv-10196 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: Nov. 10, 2015

Closed Date: March 28, 2018

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenged the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, Pub. L. No. 99-410, codified as amended at 52 U.S.C. §§ 20301 to 20311 (“UOCAVA”), and the Illinois statute implementing its requirements, known as the Illinois Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (“MOVE”) law. UOCAVA imposed a range of responsibilities on the states, including Illinois, relating to absentee voting in federal elections by uniformed service members or overseas voters. MOVE likewise addressed absent…

This case challenged the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, Pub. L. No. 99-410, codified as amended at 52 U.S.C. §§ 20301 to 20311 (“UOCAVA”), and the Illinois statute implementing its requirements, known as the Illinois Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (“MOVE”) law. UOCAVA imposed a range of responsibilities on the states, including Illinois, relating to absentee voting in federal elections by uniformed service members or overseas voters. MOVE likewise addressed absentee voting for Illinois residents who lived overseas. Under UOCAVA, former Illinois residents living in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) were not eligible to vote by absentee ballot because they were included within the statute’s definitions of “State” and the “United States.” Under Illinois MOVE, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands were not included within the definition of the “[t]erritorial limits of the United States” and thus former Illinois residents living in either American Samoa or the Northern Mariana Islands retained the right to vote by absentee ballot, although former Illinois residents living in Puerto Rico, Guam, and USVI were not afforded this right.

On November 10, 2015, a group of individuals who were former Illinois residents residing in Guam, Puerto Rico, and USVI; Iraq, Afghanistan, and Persian Gulf Veterans of the Pacific; and the League of Women Voters of the Virgin Islands filed a complaint alleging that UOCAVA and MOVE’s disparate treatment of former Illinois residents currently residing elsewhere violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments. Defendants included the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Chicago and its Chairman, Rock Island County Clerk, the United States of America and the Secretary of Defense, the Federal Voting Assistance Program and its Director. The plaintiffs requested (1) a declaratory judgment that UOCAVA and MOVE violated the Fifth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C § 1983, (2) a preliminary and permanent order enjoining defendants, their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, and all persons acting in concert with each or any of them, to accept applications to vote absentee in the next federal election in Illinois from individual plaintiffs, (3) attorneys’ fees and costs to which plaintiffs might be entitled by law; and (4) such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate. On December 4, 2015, the federal defendants submitted an answer to the complaint, denying the plaintiffs were entitled to the requested reliefs. On December 8, 2015, the Rock Island County Clerk defendant submitted an answer to the complaint, denying the plaintiffs were entitled to the requested reliefs.

On February 11, 2016, the federal defendants moved to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The federal defendants argued (1) UOCAVA did not prohibit plaintiffs from voting for federal office via absentee ballot and it merely set the bare minimum standard that states had to comply with; (2) UOCAVA met the requirements of the equal protection and due process because (a) the standard of review was rational basis review and (b) disparate treatment between U.S. citizens who moved to a different jurisdiction within the United States and those who moved overseas resulted from Congress’ concern that most American citizens residing outside the United States, who were in the private sector, continued to be excluded from the democratic process of their own country; (3) plaintiffs failed to state a § 1983 claim against the federal defendants because they did not allege that the federal defendants acted under the color of state law vis a vis UOCAVA. On March 16, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment and opposition to federal defendants’ motion to dismiss. On April 18, 2016, the federal defendants filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss, opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, and cross-motion for summary judgment.

On August 23, 2016, the court issued an order concluding that (1) plaintiffs had standing to sue because plaintiffs alleged injury were traceable to UOCAVA because (a) UOCAVA includes multiple provisions that require states to extend additional protections to UOCAVA absentee process that they might not extend to other absentee voters as a matter of state law and (b) Illinois’ ability to provide redress did not insulate the federal defendants from liability; (2) rational basis review applied in this case because, as a general proposition, U.S. citizens residing in territories had no constitutional right to vote in federal elections and the plaintiffs did not allege UOCAVA discriminated against them due to their membership in a suspect class; and (3) the challenged portions of UOCAVA satisfied that standard because (a) to support the rationality of a challenged statute, a defendant is not limited to the justifications that the legislature had in mind at the time that it passed the challenged  provisions—any rational justification for the laws will overcome an equal protection challenge and (b) the historical relationship between NMI and the U.S. could have supported UOCAVA’s constitutionality under rational basis review. The court also noted that the plaintiffs’ requested relief would not result in a universally applicable rule that permits all United States citizens in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the USVI to vote in federal elections, depending on where they previously resided. And it would be rational, at least as the term is understood in the context of rational basis review, to enact a law that does not differentiate between residents living in a particular United States Territory based on whether they could previously vote in a federal election administered by a state.

On September 23, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a second motion for summary judgment, alleging exclusion of plaintiffs’ voting rights violated equal protection principles as a matter of law under any level of scrutiny, and requesting that the court grant summary judgment against the state and federal defendants on the basis that both the federal and state statutes violated the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to interstate travel, which was protected by the substantive component of due process. On October 19, 2016, the federal defendants filed a cross-motion for summary judgment. On October 28, 2016, the court issued an order concluding (1) MOVE did not violate the plaintiffs’ equal protection rights because this statute’s different treatment of former Illinois residents living in various U.S. territories is rationally related to legitimate state interests, including the synchronization of Illinois MOVE with applicable federal overseas and absentee voting laws such as the UOCAVA’s predecessor statute, the Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act and (2) MOVE and the UOCAVA did not unconstitutionally burden their right to interstate travel because plaintiffs’ inability to vote in federal elections by absentee ballot in their respective territories stems not from a violation of their right to travel, but from the constitutional status of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the USVI. On October 28, 2016, the court entered a judgement in favor of the defendants.

On March, 20, 2018, the court entered a final judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claims against defendants and ordering that defendants shall recover costs from plaintiffs. The case is now closed. 

Summary Authors

Sebastian Miao (8/24/2024)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4507702/parties/segovia-v-board-of-election-commissioners-for-the-city-of-chicago/


Judge(s)

Gottschall, Joan B. (Illinois)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

1:15-cv-10196

Complaint

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Nov. 10, 2015

Nov. 10, 2015

Complaint
27

1:15-cv-10196

Answer of Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Chicago and Langdon D. Neal

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Dec. 4, 2015

Dec. 4, 2015

Correspondence
30

1:15-cv-10196

Answer for Karen Kinney in her Official Capacity as Rock Island County Clerk

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Dec. 8, 2015

Dec. 8, 2015

Correspondence
39

1:15-cv-10196

Federal Defendants’ Memorandum In Support Of Their Motion To Dismiss

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Feb. 10, 2016

Feb. 10, 2016

Pleading / Motion / Brief
42

1:15-cv-10196

Federal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Feb. 11, 2016

Feb. 11, 2016

Pleading / Motion / Brief
47

1:15-cv-10196

Plaintiffs’ Motion For Summary Judgment And Opposition To Federal Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss

March 16, 2016

March 16, 2016

Pleading / Motion / Brief
50

1:15-cv-10196

Federal Defendants’ Reply In Support Of Their Motion To Dismiss, Opposition To Plaintiffs’ Motion For Summary Judgment And Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

April 18, 2016

April 18, 2016

Correspondence
63

1:15-cv-10196

Memorandum Opinion And Order

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Aug. 23, 2016

Aug. 23, 2016

Order/Opinion

201 F.Supp.3d 924

70

1:15-cv-10196

Plaintiffs’ Second Motion For Summary Judgment

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Sept. 23, 2016

Sept. 23, 2016

Pleading / Motion / Brief
77

1:15-cv-10196

Federal Defendants’ Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment

Segovia v. Board of Election Commi

Oct. 19, 2016

Oct. 19, 2016

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4507702/segovia-v-board-of-election-commissioners-for-the-city-of-chicago/

Last updated Jan. 30, 2025, 2:42 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT filed by Lavonne Wise, Pamela Lynn Colon, Iraq Afghanistan and Persian Gulf Veterans of the Pacific, Jose Antonio Torres, League of Women Voters of the Virgin Islands, Tomas Ares, Luis Segovia, Anthony Bunten; Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-11285856.(Smith, Charles) (Entered: 11/10/2015)

Nov. 10, 2015

Nov. 10, 2015

Clearinghouse
6

~Util - Set/Reset Hearings AND Order

Nov. 12, 2015

Nov. 12, 2015

RECAP
7

Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 17, 2015

Nov. 17, 2015

RECAP
8

Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 17, 2015

Nov. 17, 2015

PACER
16

Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 19, 2015

Nov. 19, 2015

PACER
17

Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 20, 2015

Nov. 20, 2015

PACER
18

Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 21, 2015

Nov. 21, 2015

PACER
19

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice AND Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 23, 2015

Nov. 23, 2015

Clearinghouse
20

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice AND Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice AND Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 23, 2015

Nov. 23, 2015

Clearinghouse
25

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 50, receipt number 0752-11352864. (Swettk, Kathy) (Entered: 12/02/2015)

Dec. 2, 2015

Dec. 2, 2015

RECAP
26

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall: Attorney Kathy Laura Swett's application to appear pro hac vice 25 on behalf of the defendant Karen Kinney is granted. Mailed notice (mjc, ) (Entered: 12/03/2015)

Dec. 3, 2015

Dec. 3, 2015

PACER
27

ANSWER to Complaint by Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Chicago, Langdon D. Neal (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service Certificate of Service)(Scanlon, James) (Entered: 12/04/2015)

1 Certificate of Service Certificate of Service

View on Clearinghouse

Dec. 4, 2015

Dec. 4, 2015

Clearinghouse
28

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Chicago, Langdon D. Neal by James Michael Scanlon (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service Certificate of Service)(Scanlon, James) (Entered: 12/04/2015)

1 Certificate of Service Certificate of Service

View on Clearinghouse

Dec. 4, 2015

Dec. 4, 2015

Clearinghouse
29

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Karen Kinney by Patricia Castro (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Castro, Patricia) (Entered: 12/08/2015)

Dec. 8, 2015

Dec. 8, 2015

PACER
30

ANSWER to Complaint by Karen Kinney (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Castro, Patricia) (Entered: 12/08/2015)

1 Certificate of Service

View on Clearinghouse

Dec. 8, 2015

Dec. 8, 2015

Clearinghouse
31

MOTION by Defendants Matt Boehmer, Ashton Carter, Federal Voting Assistance Program, United States of America for extension of time To Respond to the Complaint (Unopposed) (Anderson, Caroline) (Entered: 12/16/2015)

Dec. 16, 2015

Dec. 16, 2015

Clearinghouse
32

NOTICE of Motion by Caroline J Anderson for presentment of extension of time 31 before Honorable Joan B. Gottschall on 12/23/2015 at 09:30 AM. (Anderson, Caroline) (Entered: 12/16/2015)

Dec. 16, 2015

Dec. 16, 2015

Clearinghouse
33

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall: Government defendants' unopposed motion for extension of time to respond to the complaint 31 is granted. The Government defendants shall answer or otherwise plead by 2/10/16. Motion hearing set for 12/23/15 is stricken; no appearance required. Mailed notice (mjc, ) (Entered: 12/22/2015)

Dec. 22, 2015

Dec. 22, 2015

Clearinghouse
35

Substitute Party

1 Certificate of Service

View on Clearinghouse

Jan. 12, 2016

Jan. 12, 2016

Clearinghouse
37

Order on Motion to Substitute Party

Jan. 14, 2016

Jan. 14, 2016

Clearinghouse
39

Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Feb. 10, 2016

Feb. 10, 2016

Clearinghouse
42

Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Feb. 11, 2016

Feb. 11, 2016

Clearinghouse
44

Briefing Schedule

Feb. 17, 2016

Feb. 17, 2016

Clearinghouse
46

Order on Motion to Set a Briefing Schedule AND Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Feb. 18, 2016

Feb. 18, 2016

Clearinghouse
47

Summary Judgment

March 16, 2016

March 16, 2016

Clearinghouse
50

Summary Judgment

April 18, 2016

April 18, 2016

Clearinghouse
53

Briefing Schedule

April 19, 2016

April 19, 2016

Clearinghouse
56

Order on Motion to Set a Briefing Schedule

April 22, 2016

April 22, 2016

Clearinghouse
62

Order on Motion for Summary Judgment AND Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

Aug. 23, 2016

Aug. 23, 2016

Clearinghouse
63

MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall on 8/23/2016:Mailed notice(jms, )

Aug. 23, 2016

Aug. 23, 2016

Clearinghouse
67

Withdraw as Attorney

Sept. 19, 2016

Sept. 19, 2016

Clearinghouse
69

Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Sept. 22, 2016

Sept. 22, 2016

Clearinghouse
70

Summary Judgment

Sept. 23, 2016

Sept. 23, 2016

Clearinghouse
77

Summary Judgment

Oct. 19, 2016

Oct. 19, 2016

Clearinghouse
80

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall: Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. The court denies the plaintiffs' second summary judgment motion 70 and grants the federal defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment 77 . The clerk is directed to enter final judgment accordingly. Mailed notice (mjc, ) (Entered: 10/28/2016)

Oct. 28, 2016

Oct. 28, 2016

RECAP
81

MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall on 10/28/2016. Mailed notice(mjc, )

Oct. 28, 2016

Oct. 28, 2016

RECAP
82

ENTERED JUDGMENT. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice(mjc, ) (Entered: 10/28/2016)

Oct. 28, 2016

Oct. 28, 2016

RECAP
94

Order

March 20, 2018

March 20, 2018

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Election/Voting Rights

Special Collection(s):

Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project

Key Dates

Filing Date: Nov. 10, 2015

Closing Date: March 28, 2018

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Individuals who are former Illinois residents residing in certain overseas U.S. territories that are denied absentee voting rights based on where they live, and organizations that include such individuals as members

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS FOR THE CITY OF CHICAGO (Chicago, Rock Island), State

Rock Island County Clerk (Rock Island County, Rock Island), County

Secretary of Defense (District of Columbia, District of Columbia), Federal

Director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program (District of Columbia, District of Columbia), Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentia Voting Act, 52 U.S.C. § 20301 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 1973ff et seq.)

42 U.S.C. § 1983

State law

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Equal Protection

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Non-settlement Outcome

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Declaratory Judgment

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Issues

Voting:

Voting: General & Misc.