Chris McDaniel v. Thad Cochran
158 So. 3d 992
Miss.2014Background
- June 24, 2014: Thad Cochran won the Republican U.S. Senate primary runoff; Chris McDaniel filed a challenge with the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) on August 4, 2014 (41 days after the runoff).
- McDaniel alleged illegal Democratic and absentee voting and supplemented his complaint twice; SREC declined to act, advising him to seek judicial review and noting Kellum v. Johnson’s 20‑day rule.
- McDaniel filed for judicial review on August 14, 2014; Cochran moved to dismiss as untimely under Kellum (20‑day filing requirement derived from predecessor statutes).
- Trial court dismissed McDaniel’s petition with prejudice, finding Kellum’s 20‑day deadline applicable to § 23‑15‑923 despite that statute’s silence on a filing deadline.
- Mississippi Supreme Court (majority) affirmed, applying stare decisis and reasoning that § 23‑15‑923 is a reenactment of earlier law interpreted in Kellum; McDaniel’s filing was untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (McDaniel) | Defendant's Argument (Cochran) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 23‑15‑923 contains a filing deadline for multi‑county/statewide primary contests | § 23‑15‑923 is plain and silent on timing; legislature omitted a deadline intentionally | Kellum’s construction of predecessor statutes supplies a 20‑day deadline that survived reenactment | Held: 20‑day deadline applies to contests under § 23‑15‑923; McDaniel’s filing (41 days) untimely |
| Whether Kellum v. Johnson remains controlling precedent | Kellum relied on statutes since changed; changes are material so Kellum no longer binding | Kellum interpreted predecessor statutes that were reenacted without material change; stare decisis binds | Held: Kellum remains precedential because reenactment did not materially alter the statute’s substance |
| Whether Barbour v. Gunn overruled or limited Kellum | Barbour’s exercise of jurisdiction implies later tolerance of untimely filings | Barbour did not address timeliness and therefore did not overrule Kellum | Held: Barbour did not overrule Kellum; it is inapplicable to the timeliness question |
| Whether exercising judicially created deadline violates legislative authority (Elections Clause) | Court should defer to statute’s plain text; creating a deadline intrudes on legislative function | Applying Kellum merely interprets historical legislative enactment; Court is resolving statutory ambiguity, not making law | Held: No constitutional violation; the 20‑day rule is derived from longstanding statutory scheme and judicial interpretation |
Key Cases Cited
- Kellum v. Johnson, 115 So.2d 147 (Miss. 1959) (interpreting predecessor election statutes to impose a 20‑day filing deadline for multi‑county primary contests)
- Barbour v. Gunn, 890 So.2d 843 (Miss. 2004) (addressed judicial review and SREC timing but did not decide timeliness of filing)
- Caves v. Yarbrough, 991 So.2d 142 (Miss. 2008) (discussed stare decisis and the presumption that legislature reenacts statutes with judicial interpretations unless material changes are made)
- McDaniel v. Beane, 515 So.2d 949 (Miss. 1987) (held prior judicial interpretation is engrafted into a statute reenacted without substantial change)