From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...
Miller v. Cunningham
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
512 F.3d 98 (2007)
Virginia typically allowed party organizations to choose nominating procedures in primary elections. However, if an incumbent state legislator sought reelection, state law allowed the incumbent to choose the nominating procedure, including a primary, even if it was not the procedure the party organization selected. Virginia law also required primaries be open to all qualified voters, so long as a voter did not vote for the candidates of more than one party. Stephen Martin, an incumbent Republican legislator seeking reelection, choose to have a primary. The 11th District Committee (the Committee) (plaintiff), the local outpost of the Republican Party, wanted to have a semiclosed primary, excluding voters who had voted in a Democratic Party primary in the last five years, despite Virginia law not recognizing semiclosed primaries. The Virginia State Board of Elections (the Board) (defendant) denied the Committee’s request to hold a semiclosed primary, citing the open-primary law. The Committee sued, arguing that the open-primary law violated the Committee’s First and Fourteenth Amendment right of free association. The district court held that the state law requiring open primaries was not facially unconstitutional but was unconstitutional as applied when an incumbent having the power to choose the nominating process decided to hold a primary. In such a case, the law violated the Committee’s right of association by preventing the Committee from excluding unwanted voters. A panel of the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding, and the Board appealed, requesting that the case be reheard en banc.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning
Dissent (Wilkinson, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 518,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 518,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.