Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

League of Women Voters of Mich. v. Johnson

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided November 30, 2018No. 2:17-cv-14148Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partQuist, District Judge

I agree with the majority opinion that Plaintiffs have satisfied standing at this stage of litigation on a district-by-district basis and that, in the same vein, the League of Women Voters of Michigan has derivative standing to challenge the districts in which its members reside. But I disagree with the majority opinion's rationale in the discussion section I.B.2. Specifically, in my view, no Plaintiff-not the League or any individually named Plaintiff-has properly supported standing for a statewide claim.

As the majority opinion explains, the individual Plaintiffs have brought forth…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Havens Realty Corp. v. ColemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Crawford v. Marion County Election BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  3. Lance v. CoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Vieth v. JubelirerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Gill v. WhitfordSupreme Court of the United States · 2018

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API