DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE ET AL.
v.
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ET AL. MALONE, INTERVENOR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An Ohio voter intervened in a dispute between the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee over alleged threats to challenge voters on a Republican-compiled list, claiming her voting rights were jeopardized. The District Court issued an injunction preventing the challenges, but the Third Circuit Court of Appeals granted the Republican National Committee's request to stay the injunction en banc. Justice Souter, as Circuit Justice, denied the voter's application to stay the en banc order and reinstate the injunction, particularly because she had already voted without challenge.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Justice Souter, Circuit Justice.
The individual Ohio voter who intervened in this case claimed that the Republican National Committee threatened to violate a consent decree, by challenging Ohio voters named on a list of 35,000 individual names compiled by Republican officials in Ohio in cooperation with the Republican National Committee. She alleged that her right to vote and that of other minority voters would be jeopardized by the anticipated challenges from the Republican side. Yesterday, the District Court found such a threatened violation and issued the injunction requested, a stay of which was denied by a divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit late last night. Following the action that was subject to Justice Stevens’s opinion in chambers earlier today in Spencer v. Pugh, ante, p. 1301, the Republican National Committee moved for rehearing or rehearing en banc, the latter of which was granted this afternoon by order staying the injunction. No. 04-4186, 2004 U.
S. App. LEXIS 22689 (CA3, Nov. 2, 2004).. The intervenor alone has now applied to me in my capacity as Circuit Justice for the Third Circuit for a stay of the en banc order itself, which would effectively reinstate the injunction. Since making the application, she has filed a further pleading disclosing that she has already voted without challenge. Under the circumstances, I have decided against referring the application to the full Court and now deny it.
It is so ordered.