SCOTUS Runs Out Clock On Expanded Early Voting in Ohio

In breaking news, by a 5-4 decision (you can predict the breakdowns, can’t you?) the U.S. Supreme Court set aside a 6th Circuit Court of Appeals order preventing Ohio from significantly reducing early voting opportunities. Worse yet, by refusing to make a substantive ruling while inviting the state to file a formal appeal to the 6th Circuit ruling, SCOTUS effectively ran out the clock since the disputed portion of early voting will have passed by the time the requisite procedures can be followed.

Now Election Law Blog‘s Rick Hasen argues supporters of voting rights didn’t have the best case in Ohio, which still has a pretty robust early election program compared to other states. Hasen also fears the Ohio case could give SCOTUS a hook to issue a more sweeping repudiation of the claim that early voting is protected by constitution or statute. But the way the SCOTUS majority handled the case was, well, under-handed.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really works—and how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, I’ll make a donation

Ed Kilgore

Ed Kilgore is a political columnist for New York and managing editor at the Democratic Strategist website. He was a contributing writer at the Washington Monthly from January 2012 until November 2015, and was the principal contributor to the Political Animal blog.