CASE SUMMARY
On August 23, 2021, a coalition of community and voting rights organizations and Wisconsin voters filed a federal lawsuit against the members of the Wisconsin Elections Commission challenging the state's 2010-cycle legislative districts as unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that the results of the 2020 Census showed that population shifts over the last decade had rendered Wisconsin's legislative districts malapportioned in violation of the one person, one vote constitutional requirement and that their 1st Amendment rights to communicate and contribute to legislative candidates were hindered without a valid redistricting plan in place. The plaintiffs requested a judicial declaration that the state's 2010-cycle legislative districts were unconstitutional, an injunction barring the districts from being utilized in future elections, and a court-established schedule that would enable the court to adopt and implement a new, valid redistricting plan in the event the Wisconsin Legislature and Governor were unable to do so in a timely manner.
On September 16, 2021, the court consolidated this action with a similar case challenging Wisconsin’s electoral districts, Hunter v. Bostelmann. On October 6, 2021, the case was stayed in light of the redistricting challenge petition accepted by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Johnson v. Wisconsin Elections Commission. On November 18, 2021, the court issued an order extending the stay of this case until January 4, 2022. On December 17, 2021, the court further extended the stay until January 28, 2022.
On March 3, 2022 the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an opinion and order in Johnson v. Wisconsin Elections Commission adopting the congressional and legislative plans proposed by the Governor as final and directing the state to implement them for use in future elections. On March 7, 2022 the Wisconsin Legislature filed an emergency application for a stay of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's ruling adopting the legislative plans pending a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. On March 9, the Congressmen Intervenors filed a similar application with the U.S. Supreme Court in regards to the adopted congressional plan.
On March 23, 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order denying the Congressmen Intervenors' request for a stay on the adopted congressional plan. That same day, the Court issued an opinion reversing and remanding the Wisconsin Supreme Court's adoption of the Governor's legislative redistricting plans on the grounds it erroneously applied the Court's precedents as to the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause and the Voting Rights Act. Specifically, the Court found the Wisconsin Supreme Court committed legal error by concluding the Governor's intentional addition of a seventh majority-black legislative district satisfied strict scrutiny review under the Equal Protection Clause, reiterating its holding in Cooper v. Harris that a State must show it had a "strong basis in evidence" for concluding that their race-based redistricting decisions were necessary for compliance with § 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Court remanded the case back to the Wisconsin Supreme Court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion and equal protection jurisprudence.
On May 5, 2022, the federal district court dismissed the case in light of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision in Johnson v. Wisconsin Elections Commission.
Related Case: Hunter v. Bostelmann
Similar Case: Johnson v. Wisconsin Elections Commission
CASE LIBRARY
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin - No. 3:21-cv-534
- Complaint - 8/23/21
- Order Appointing Three-Judge Court - 8/26/21
- Parties Joint Proposal Regarding Scheduling - 9/13/21
- Plaintiffs' Statement Regarding Proposed Intervention - 9/13/21
- Opinion and Order - 9/16/21
- Motion to Intervene by the Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenors Citizen Data Scientists - 9/20/21
- Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Intervene by Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenors Citizen Data Scientists - 9/20/21
- Complaint of Intervenor-Plaintiffs - 9/21/21
- First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief - 9/21/21
- Order - 9/21/21
- Notice of State Court Proceedings and Motion to Stay Proceedings - 9/23/21
- Notice by the Wisconsin Legislature - 9/23/21
- Notice by the Wisconsin Legislature of U.S. Supreme Court Petition - 9/24/21
- Motion to Dismiss BLOC Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint by the Wisconsin Legislature - 9/30/21
- Motion to Dismiss Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Complaint by the Wisconsin Legislature - 9/30/21
- Defendants' Answer to BLOC Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint - 9/30/21
- Intervenor-Defendant Governor Tony Evers' Response to Stay Motion - 10/1/21
- Response to Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion to Stay by the Wisconsin Legislature - 10/1/21
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al.'s, Statement Regarding the Johnson Plaintiffs' Second Motion to Stay and the Wisconsin Supreme Court's Grant of Petition for Original Action in Johnson v. Wisconsin Elections Commission - 10/1/21
- Defendants' Response to Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay - 10/1/21
- Hunter Plaintiffs' Opposition to Johnson Intervenors' Second Motion to Stay Proceedings - 10/1/21
- Notice of Position of Proposed Plaintiff-Intervenor Citizen Data Scientists on Matters Raised in the Court's September 23, 2021 Order - 10/1/21
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay Proceedings - 10/1/21
- Declaration of Douglas M. Poland in Support of BLOC Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay Proceedings - 10/1/21
- Joint Proposed Discovery Plan and Pretrial Schedule - 10/1/21
- Plaintiffs' Conditional Motion for Leave to File Reply to Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al.'s, Proposed Response - 10/4/21
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Reply in Support of Motion to Stay Proceedings - 10/5/21
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Opposition to the Wisconsin Legislature's Motion to Dismiss - 10/6/21
- Opinion and Order - 10/6/21
- Intervenor-Defendant Governor Tony Evers' Answer to Amended Complaint - 10/7/21
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al.'s, Motion to Dismiss the Johnson Plaintiffs' Complaint - 10/7/21
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Opposition to the Congressmen Intervenor-Defendants' Motion to Dismiss - 10/19/21
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Wisconsin Legislature's Motion to Dismiss - 10/20/21
- Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss BLOC Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint by the Wisconsin Legislature - 10/27/21
- Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Johnson Plaintiffs' Complaint by the Wisconsin Legislature - 10/27/21
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al.'s, Reply in Support of Their Motion to Dismiss the Johnson Plaintiffs' Complaint - 10/27/21
- Joint Submission on Status of Proceedings in the Wisconsin Supreme Court - 11/5/21
- Order Continuing Stay Until December 6, 2021 - 11/17/21
- Plaintiffs' Expedited Motion for Status Conference - 2/24/22
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Position on Dismissal - 3/18/22
- Bostelmann, et al., Defendants' Statement on Dismissal - 3/18/22
- Intervenor-Defendant Governor Evers's Statement on Dismissal - 3/18/22
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Statement of Dismissal - 3/18/22
- Hunter Plaintiffs' Statement in Opposition to Dismissal - 3/18/22
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman's, et al., Position on Dismissal - 3/18/22
- The Wisconsin Legislature's Position on Dismissal - 3/18/22
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Updated Position on Dismissal - 3/25/22
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al., Response to This Court's March 21, 2022 Order - 3/25/22
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Updated Position on Dismissal - 3/28/22
- Hunter Plaintiffs' Updated Statement in Opposition to Dismissal - 3/28/22
- Intervenor-Defendant Governor Tony Evers' Updated Statement of Position - 3/28/22
- The Wisconsin Legislature's Response Regarding Dismissal - 3/28/22
- Johnson Intervenor-Plaintiffs' Updated Position on Dismissal - 4/20/22
- The Wisconsin Legislature's Response Regarding Dismissal - 4/20/22
- Congressmen Glenn Grothman, et al., Response to This Court's April 1, 2022 Order - 4/20/22
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Position on Status - 4/20/22
- Intervenor-Defendant Governor Evers's Position on Status - 4/20/22
- Hunter Plaintiffs' Statement on Case Status - 4/20/22
- BLOC Plaintiffs' Updated Position on Status - 5/4/22
- Hunter Plaintiffs' Statement on Case Status - 5/4/22