Rossito-Canty v. Cuomo, 86 F. Supp. 3d 175

Rep. Michael G. Grimm resigned effective Jan. 5, 2015, leaving New York’s 11th Congressional District (Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn) without voting representation in the U.S. House.
Under N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 42(3) a governor’s proclamation sets a special-election date to occur 70–80 days after proclamation; the Governor had not issued a proclamation and asserted discretion over timing.
Plaintiffs (eight registered voters in the district) sued Governor Andrew Cuomo seeking an order compelling him to fix a special-election date immediately.
The court held an expedited show-cause hearing, found plaintiffs had standing and ripe claims, and indicated it would set a date unless the Governor issued a proclamation or justified delay by Feb. 20, 2015.
The court emphasized constitutional and state-law principles favoring prompt filling of congressional vacancies and found plaintiffs made a prima facie showing for injunctive relief (irreparable harm, likelihood on the merits, balance of hardships, and public interest).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Governor must promptly call a special election to fill a House vacancy	Governor has a mandatory duty under Art. I §2 to issue writs of election; state law and constitution require filling vacancies as soon as reasonably possible	§42(3) vests discretion in the Governor to choose timing; no constitutional requirement for immediate proclamation	Court held issuing a proclamation is mandatory in the absence of adequate justification and directed the Governor to act or justify delay by a set date
Standing to sue over delayed special election	Voters suffer concrete injury (deprivation of representation); injury traceable to Governor; relief would redress injury	(Implicit) political question or lack of individualized injury	Court found plaintiffs had Article III standing
Ripeness of claim	Injury (lack of representation) is actual and imminent, not speculative	(Implicit) timing may render dispute non-justiciable until Governor acts	Court held the claim ripe for adjudication
Appropriateness of preliminary/permanent injunctive relief	Delay causes irreparable harm not remediable by money; plaintiffs likely to succeed on merits; public interest favors representation	Governor cited logistical concerns and discretion; argued courts should not set election timing	Court concluded plaintiffs made a prima facie showing for injunction and set a further hearing, warning it would set the date if Governor did not act or justify delay

FCC v. Beach Commc’ns, Inc., 508 U.S. 307 (1993) (courts generally defer to legislative choices absent constitutional violation)
Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964) (the right to representation in Congress is fundamental)
Valenti v. Rockefeller, 393 U.S. 405 (1969) (state procedures for filling vacancies fall within state discretion but are subject to constitutional constraints)
Jackson v. Ogilvie, 426 F.2d 1333 (7th Cir. 1970) (state executive required to issue writ to fill House vacancy)
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Taft, 385 F.3d 641 (6th Cir. 2004) (governor violated Constitution by refusing to call special election when time remaining not de minimis)
Judge v. Quinn, 624 F.3d 352 (7th Cir. 2010) (Seventeenth Amendment claims justiciable; equity may require special election)
Fox v. Paterson, 715 F. Supp. 2d 431 (W.D.N.Y. 2010) (short delay to comply with federal voting requirements may be justified, but de facto refusal to call an election can be unconstitutional)
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) (apportionment and representation issues are justiciable)
Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964) (the right to vote and representation are fundamental)