Stringer

HTTP 404 Not Found

Last Updated: June 22, 2020 at 2:24 PM

Stringer v. Cascos

Case Information

Date Filed: March 24, 2020
State: Texas
Issues: Voter Eligibility, Improper Election Administration, Voting Technology
Current Court: U.S. District Court District for the Western District of Texas (Case 5:16-cv-00257)

Issue:

Whether Texas's administration of its online driver registration database violates the “Motor Voter” provisions of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection by not providing a location to change one's address for voter registration purposes when updating address for licensure reasons.

Status:

Motion to Dismiss 2/11/20.

U.S. District For The Western District Of Texas Court Documents

(3/14/16)

Civil Cover Sheet

(3/14/16)

(3/14/16)

(3/14/16)

(3/14/16)

(3/14/16)

(3/14/16)

Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim

(5/16/16)

(5/16/16)

Response in Opposition to Motion To Dismiss

(5/31/16)

Defendant's Reply To Response To Motion To Dismiss

(6/21/16)

Motion For Protective Order

(9/16/16)

(9/16/16)

(9/16/16)

(9/16/16)

(9/16/16)

(9/16/16)

Response To Motion For Protective Order

(9/23/16)

Memorandum In Support Of Motion For Protective Order

(10/15/16)

Order Denying Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim

(5/31/17)

Original Answer To Complaint By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(4/21/17)

Motion For Summary Judgment By Benjamin Hernandez, Jarrod Stringer, John Woods

(6/30/17)

(6/30/17)

(6/30/17)

Defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(6/30/17)

Appendix Exhibits

(6/30/17)

Defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(6/18/17)

Response In Opposition To Motion For Summary Judgment

(7/28/17)

(7/28/17)

(7/28/17)

Response To Motion For Summay Judgment

(7/28/17)

Reply To Response To Motion For Summary Judgment Filed By Benjamin Hernandez, Jarrod Stringer, John Woods

(8/4/17)

Reply To Response To Motion For Summary Judgment Filed By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(8/4/17)

Order Granting 77 Motion For Summary Judgment; Denying 82 Motion For Summary Judgment

(3/3/18)

Order Granting Motion For Judicial Notice

(4/26/18)

Order That Plaintiff's Motion Granted re 77 Motion For Summary Judgment Filed By Jarrod Stringer, Benjamin Hernandez, John Woods, Denied 82 Motion For Summary Judgment Filed By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(5/10/18)

Final Judgment. Signed By Chief Judge Orlando L. Garcia

(5/18/18)

Appeal Of Final Judgment 109 By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(5/21/18)

Opposed Motion To Stay Pending Appeal By Carlos H. Cascos, Steven C. McCraw

(5/23/18)

Affidavit Buaas Declaration

(5/23/18)

Affidavit Ingram Declaration

(5/23/18)

Affidavit Gipson Declaration

(5/23/18)

(5/23/18)

Response in Opposition to Motion To Stay Pending Appeal

(5/24/18)

(5/24/18)

Letter Of Transmittal From USCA Received For 110 Notice Of Appeal

(5/31/18)

Transmittal Letter From USCA5

(5/31/18)

Certified Copy Of USCA Judgment/Mandate Remanding 110 Notice Of Appeal

(12/5/19)

Transmittal Letter From USCA5

(12/5/19)

Motion To Intervene By DCCC, DSCC, Texas Democratic Party

(12/20/19)

Exhibit A - Press Release

(12/20/19)

Intervenor-Plaintiffs Complaint For Declaratory And Injunctive Relief

(12/20/19)

(12/20/19)

Appendix To 124 Motion To Intervene By DCCC, DSCC, Texas Democratic Party

(12/20/19)

Exhibit 1-Declaration Of John Geise

(12/20/19)

Exhibit A-Press Release

(12/20/19)

Defendant's Response In Opposition To Motion To Intervene

(1/10/20)

Reply To Response To Motion To Intervene, Filed Ny DCCC, DSCC, Texas Democratic Party

(1/17/20)

Order To Consolidate Case No: SA-20-CV-46-OG

(1/21/20)

Intervenor Complaint, Filed By DSCC, DCCC, Texas Democratic Party

(1/21/20)

Order Of Dismissal, Pursuant To The Fifth Circuit's Judgment And Mandate Entered On November 13,2019

(1/21/20)

Order. Signed By Chief Judge Orlando L. Garcia

(1/24/20)

Defendant's Response To Motion In Opposition To Plaintiffs' Emergency Application For Preliminary Injunction

(1/27/20)

(1/27/20)

(1/27/20)

(1/27/20)

(1/27/20)

Plaintiff's Supplemental Reply To Defendant's Response To Emergency Application For Preliminary Injunction

(1/28/20)

Exhibit Exhibits 1-10

(1/28/20)

Exhibit Exhibit 11

(1/28/20)

Order Granting Preliminary Injunction As To DCCC, DSCC, Nayeli Gomez, John Harms, League of Womens Voters of Texas, MOVE Texas Civic Fund, Jarrod Stringer, Texas Democratic Party

(1/30/20)

Response In Support Of Motion For Leave To File Intervenors' Motion For Summary Judgment

(2/11/20)

Motion To Dismiss By Carlos H. Cascos, Ruth Hughs, Steven C. McCraw

(2/11/20)

Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals Court Documents

Civil Rights Case Docketed

(5/23/18)

Defendants’ Opposed Emergency Motion To Stay Injunction Pending Appeal

(5/28/18)

Plaintiffs’ Response To Defendants’ Emergency Motion To Stay Injunction Pending Appeal

(5/30/18)

Order Granting Opposed Emergency Motion To Stay Injunction Pending Appeal

(5/31/18)

Published Opinion Filed

(11/13/19)

Judgment Entered And Filed

(11/13/19)

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

Gerrymandering as Viewpoint Discrimination: A "Functional Equivalence" Test

Edward B. Foley

A First Amendment test for identifying when a map is functionally equivalent to a facially discriminatory statute.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

This is why US election ballots routinely go missing

Professor Dan Tokaji was quoted in USA Today about the prevalence of missing election ballots.

"Most of the time, it just goes unreported because it doesn't affect the result," Tokaji said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Supreme Court Finds Partisan Gerrymandering Claims to be Non-Justiciable Political Questions

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion on Thursday determining that claims of partisan gerrymandering are political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts. The opinion resolved disputes originating in North Carolina and Maryland, in the cases of Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek.

more info & analysis...

Major Pending Cases

more litigation...

Election Law @ Moritz | The Ohio State University Michael E. Moritz College of Law | electionlaw@osu.edu

Please note: Election Law @ Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law @ Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law @ Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.

PDF files in this site require Adobe Reader to view (link opens in NEW window). If you have trouble accessing this page or need to request an alternate format, please email the Moritz Law Webmaster.