Swann v. Secretary of Georgia
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1967
| 11th Cir. | 2012Background
- Swann, an inmate in DeKalb County Jail, applied for an absentee ballot for 2008, listing his home address as the registered address and leaving the mailing-address line blank because he did not know the jail's address.
- Georgia law generally required absentee ballots to be mailed to the elector's registered or specified address, and jail mail to inmates was initially denied for non-disabled voters to non-registered addresses within the county.
- Officials devised a workaround by mailing ballots to inmates' home addresses and placing ballots with a drop box at the jail for inmate pickup; Swann was not given the jail-drop option because he had not provided the jail address.
- The ballot clerk mailed Swann a ballot to his home address, not to the jail, and Swann did not receive any ballot and could not vote in the 2008 election.
- Swann and Hartfield sued, claiming application of Ga. Code Ann. § 21-2-381(a)(1)(D) violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process rights; Hartfield was later dismissed for noncompliance with a court order.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the officials, holding Swann’s equal protection claim failed for lack of a different treatment versus similarly situated inmates and that Swann would not have received a ballot at the jail even if mailed there.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Swann has standing to challenge | Swann argues injury is fairly traceable to defendants' application of the statute. | Defendants contend Swann's injury is not traceable because he did not request jail mail and would have been denied regardless. | Swann lacks standing; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. |
| Fair traceability of injury to challenged action | Swann's injury resulted from defendants' statutory application. | Independent action of third party (the clerk) caused any harm; Swann did not request jail mailing. | Not traceable; injury not fairly caused by defendants' actions. |
| Futility exception to standing | Swann argues futility excusing failure to request jail mailing. | No futility exception applies without actual request and evidence of would-be different outcome. | Futility exception inapplicable; no standing. |
| Merits of the constitutional claims depend on standing | If standing existed, the claims would have merit. | Standing prevents reaching merits. | We vacate and remand to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (establishes three elements of standing)
- Simon v. E. Ky. Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. 26 (1976) (injury must be fairly traceable to challenged action)
- Pennsylvania v. New Jersey, 426 U.S. 660 (1976) (controversy requires causation and redressability)
- Ass'n of Cmty. Orgs. for Reform Now v. Fowler, 178 F.3d 350 (5th Cir. 1999) (standing limitations based on causal chain)
- Hollywood Mobile Estates Ltd. v. Seminole Tribe of Fla., 641 F.3d 1264 (11th Cir. 2011) (standing is jurisdictional and must be addressed first)
- Bochese v. Town of Ponce Inlet, 405 F.3d 964 (11th Cir. 2005) (standing may be defeated by independent causes)
- Donahue v. City of Boston, 371 F.3d 7 (1st Cir. 2004) (standing defeated where independent causes produce same injury)
- Marshall v. Meadows, 105 F.3d 904 (4th Cir. 1997) (standing defeated by independent cause)
- Howard v. N.J. Dep't of Civil Serv., 667 F.2d 1099 (3d Cir. 1981) (standing requirements and causation discussed)
- Fla. State Conf. of NAACP v. Browning, 522 F.3d 1153 (11th Cir. 2008) (pre-enforcement challenges and standing considerations)