447 F.Supp.3d 757
W.D. Wis.2020Background
- Plaintiffs (Democratic National Committee and Democratic Party of Wisconsin) sought a TRO and preliminary injunction for the April 7, 2020 election to (1) extend the online/mail‑in registration deadline (March 18, 2020), (2) extend the deadline for counting absentee ballots (received by 8:00 p.m. on election day), and (3) waive proof‑of‑residence and photo‑ID requirements for online/mail and absentee processes.
- The request arose amid the COVID‑19 pandemic, state closures and warnings against public gatherings, and a surge in absentee ballot requests (hundreds of thousands).
- The court held a telephonic hearing, allowed the Wisconsin Legislature to seek intervention, and received a WEC declaration describing technical and administrative implementation concerns.
- Applying the Anderson‑Burdick framework, the court found plaintiffs had standing and that online registration closure likely imposed an undue burden given health‑related barriers to in‑person registration.
- The court granted a narrow TRO: it ordered WEC to reopen online registration through March 30, 2020 (with testing, notice, and rollback conditions), enjoined enforcement of the March 18 online deadline, and denied (without prejudice) relief as to the absentee receipt deadline and the ID/proof requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to sue | Party plaintiffs can sue for members' voting injuries and for diversion of resources | State argued threshold jurisdiction matters, but did not substantially dispute organizational standing | Plaintiffs have organizational and representational standing |
| Online/mail‑in registration deadline (Mar 18) | Deadline imposes undue burden during pandemic by forcing voters to choose between health and in‑person registration; brief extension minimally harms state administration | WEC cited technical risks, poll‑book printing, administrative burdens, and voter confusion from late change | Court found likelihood of success on merits for online registration; ordered extension of online registration to Mar 30, 2020 and enjoined enforcement of Mar 18 online deadline |
| Proof of residence and photo‑ID requirements | Requiring uploaded ID or proof may force at‑risk voters to leave home (copiers/printers) and disproportionately burdens elderly/poor/students | State relied on substantial state interests in preventing fraud and preserving confidence (Crawford/Frank precedent) and availability of smartphone uploads | Court denied TRO on this issue (plaintiffs failed to show likely success on merits on this record) |
| Absentee ballot receipt deadline (arrival by 8:00 p.m. election day) | Plaintiffs sought extension to account for mail delays and surge in absentee voting due to COVID‑19 | State urged no record showing need now; administrative and legal uncertainties | Court reserved this claim for possible preliminary injunction with fuller record; denied TRO as to receipt deadline without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (1983) (framework for evaluating burdens on voting and balancing state interests)
- Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (1992) (establishes flexible balancing test for election‑law burdens)
- Crawford v. Marion Cty. Election Bd., 553 U.S. 181 (2008) (upholds photo‑ID requirement; recognizes substantial state interests)
- Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006) (cautions against last‑minute changes to election rules)
- Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976) (irreparable harm presumption where constitutional rights threatened)
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., 528 U.S. 167 (2000) (associational standing principles)
- Whitaker By Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1 Bd. of Educ., 858 F.3d 1034 (7th Cir. 2017) (standard for preliminary injunctive relief)
- Obama for Am. v. Husted, 697 F.3d 423 (6th Cir. 2012) (restriction on voting as irreparable injury)
- Frank v. Walker, 768 F.3d 744 (7th Cir. 2014) (applying Crawford to Wisconsin photo‑ID challenges)
- One Wisconsin Inst., Inc. v. Thomsen, 198 F. Supp. 3d 896 (W.D. Wis. 2016) (district court discussion of Anderson‑Burdick and organizational standing)