Service Employees International Union Local 1 v. Husted, 531 F. App'x 755

SEIU and other unions challenged Ohio election procedures; district court granted injunctive relief two weeks before the November 2012 election.
Ohio sought emergency relief in this court; on October 31, 2012 this court issued a per curiam stay of the district court’s injunction.
The November 2012 elections were held and all results were certified; no contests remained and the district-court injunction expired by its own terms.
SEIU appealed the stay order and sought vacatur of the stay when the case became moot.
Ohio and the Ohio Secretary of State opposed vacatur and argued the stay order should remain in place.
The Sixth Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot and denied SEIU’s request to vacate the stay order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Mootness of appeal	Appeal should continue to obtain relief and clarification	Appeal is moot because elections are completed and injunction expired	Appeal dismissed as moot
Whether to vacate the appellate stay order	Vacatur needed to avoid entrenching an unreviewable decision and to preserve ability to litigate merits and seek en banc review	No vacatur; vacatur unnecessary because staying a preliminary injunction is not a final merits judgment and other remedies (district court merits decision or Supreme Court emergency relief) were available	Denied vacatur; stay order left intact
Prejudice from loss of en banc review	SEIU argued loss of en banc review prejudiced its rights	Court noted SEIU could have sought emergency Supreme Court review and suffered no unfair prejudice	Court rejected prejudice argument
Jurisprudential value of the stay order	Vacatur required despite guidance value	Stay provides useful guidance on last-minute election injunctions and therefore need not be vacated	Court found jurisprudential purpose supported denial of vacatur

Coal. for Gov’t Procurement v. Fed. Prison Indus., Inc., 365 F.3d 435 (6th Cir. 2004) (describing Munsingwear vacatur practice)
United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36 (1950) (establishing vacatur practice when cases become moot on appeal)
Stewart v. Blackwell, 473 F.3d 692 (6th Cir. 2007) (vacatur appropriate to avoid entrenching unreviewable decisions)
McLane v. Mercedes-Benz of N. Am., Inc., 3 F.3d 522 (1st Cir. 1993) (interlocutory appeals may be dismissed without vacatur)
In re Tax Refund Litig., 915 F.2d 58 (2d Cir. 1990) (dismissal without vacatur for moot interlocutory appeals)
Marilyn T., Inc. v. Evans, 803 F.2d 1383 (5th Cir. 1986) (same)
Gjertsen v. Bd. of Election Comm’rs, 751 F.2d 199 (7th Cir. 1984) (same)
Gaylord Broad. Co. v. Cosmos Broad. Corp., 746 F.2d 251 (5th Cir. 1984) (same)
Univ. of Texas v. Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390 (1981) (findings in preliminary injunctions are not binding on the merits)
Certified Restoration Dry Cleaning Network, L.L.C. v. Tenke Corp., 511 F.3d 535 (6th Cir. 2007) (same principle regarding preliminary injunctions)
Brunner v. Ohio Republican Party, 555 U.S. 5 (2008) (example of emergency Supreme Court review in election-related stays)