Stewart v. Blackwell
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
444 F.3d 843, 473 F.2d 692 (2006)
- Written by Philip Glass, JD
Facts
In Ohio, 81 out of 88 counties used non-notice voting technology during the 2000 general election. The remainder of Ohio's counties used notice technology, which alerted voters when an error or failure occurred upon the casting of a ballot. Non-notice voting technology did not alert voters to the occurrence of errors or failures upon the casting of a ballot. Punch-card ballots were relied on in 69 counties in Ohio, and 11 used optical-scan technology, both of which likewise increased the risk of error. Statistical analyses demonstrated significant error-rate disparities between these technologies and notice technology. The use of non-notice technology rested on the justification of greater cost expediency. Ohio voters (plaintiffs) alleged that this defective technology violated the Equal Protection Clause. The district court ruled against Ohio voters, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard this appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Martin Jr., J.)
Dissent (Gilman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
