Filed Date: June 3, 2022
Closed Date: Feb. 21, 2023
Clearinghouse coding complete
Plaintiff, a private citizen who attempted to join a ballot as an independent candidate, filed his initial complaint on June 3, 2022 against the Secretary of State of the State of Alabama alleging a violation of the 14th Amendment Due Process clause. Plaintiff alleged that he attempted to obtain the required number of signatures to obtain access to the ballot as an independent candidate by following pre-pandemic requirements and was unable to do so because of the existence of the pandemic and as a result, he was denied ballot access because he did not obtain enough signatures.
Additionally, on June 3, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis with the Court to allow him to proceed with the case without the prepayment of fees, costs or security therefor. On June 7, 2022, the Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for consideration and disposition or recommendation of all pretrial matters. On June 10, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion to have the Court place his case on the Court’s calendar to hear his request for the appointment of counsel matter and on the same day, Plaintiff also filed a motion for the Court to appoint him legal counsel for all matters related to his case.
On June 21, 2022, the Court issued an order finding that based on its review of Plaintiff’s complaint, Plaintiff was able to adequately articulate the facts and grounds for relief and that the Plaintiff’s complaint is not of undue complexity that would justify the appointment of counsel and the Court denied both of Plaintiff’ motions.
On July 26, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, which the court interpreted as an appeal to the District Court Judge.
On December 20, 2022, the Court issued an order that stated that Plaintiff’s factual allegations are not sufficient to state a plausible claim that the Defendant Secretary of State failed to follow his own Covid-19 relief guidelines. Additionally, the Court noted that the requested relief appeared to be moot because the 2022 General Election had already occurred. The Court requested that Plaintiff show cause why the action should not be dismissed as moot by January 13, 2023.
On January 24, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation that the case be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment be denied as moot.
On February 21, 2023, the Court issued an opinion stating that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted and appropriate judgment would be entered. Judgment was entered on February 21, 2023 confirming the closure of the case.
Summary Authors
Leilani Argersinger (12/10/2024)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63365194/parties/sanders-v-merrill-mag/
Thompson, Myron Herbert (Alabama)
Sanders, Jarmal Jabbar (Alabama)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63365194/sanders-v-merrill-mag/
Last updated Dec. 3, 2025, 7:34 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 3, 2022
Closing Date: Feb. 21, 2023
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
independent candidate running for public office who tried to obtain ballot access
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
John H. Merrill, Private Entity/Person
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
Middle District of Alabama 2:22-cv-00334
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Defendant
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Voting: