Previous 1 / 5 Next

Cite as: 592 U. S. ____ (2020) 1 SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _________________ No. 20A67 _________________ JOHN H. MERRILL, ALABAMA SECRETARY OF STATE, ET AL. v. PEOPLE FIRST OF ALABAMA, ET AL. ON APPLICATION FOR STAY [October 21, 2020] The application for stay presented to JUSTICE THOMAS and by him referred to the Court is granted, and the district court’s September 30, 2020 order granting a permanent injunction is stayed pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting from grant of stay. This stay application arises from the Alabama secretary of state’s decision to ban curbside voting despite the ongoing COVID–19 crisis and the willingness of certain Alabama counties to assist voters with disabilities. Following a lengthy trial and resting on an extensive record, the District Court found, among other things, that the secretary’s ban violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by forcing voters with disabilities, for whom COVID–19 is disproportionately likely to be fatal, to risk unnecessary exposure to the virus if they wish to vote in person. The District Court enjoined the secretary’s ban, thus allowing counties that are ready to adopt curbside voting to do so. I would not

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Merrill v. People First of Alabama

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the Alabama Secretary of State’s prohibition on curbside voting violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the First and Fourteenth Amendments by denying reasonable accommodations to voters with disabilities during the pandemic.

Alleged Acts: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant illness and death in Alabama, presenting particularly severe risks for individuals with underlying chronic health conditions. The Alabama Secretary of State instituted a policy strictly prohibiting counties from offering curbside voting. Because of the statewide ban, vulnerable voters who wished to vote in person were forced to wait inside among crowds where face coverings were not mandated, thereby risking unnecessary exposure to the virus. Alternatively, vulnerable voters could vote by absentee ballot, but this required satisfying distinct burdens not present for in-person voting, such as obtaining witnesses, notaries, and copies of photo IDs.

Procedural history: On September 30, 2020, a federal court ruled that Alabama voters would not need a witness or notary to vote by mail if they have an underlying medical condition and provide a statement. Additionally, the decision stipulated that voters 65 and older with an underlying medical condition would not need an ID so long as they provide other identifying information such as their driver’s license number or last four digits of their Social Security number. Finally, the decision ordered the state to allow counties to implement curbside voting, concluding that the ban on curbside voting violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by requiring voters with disabilities, who have a higher risk of serious complications or death from the virus, to cast their ballots in person and therefore increase their exposure to the virus. However, on October 13, 2020, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's ruling and reinstated the witness and photo ID requirements, while maintaining the lift on the curbside voting ban. The State of Alabama went to the Supreme Court, who, in a one-paragraph order, granted the request by Alabama election officials to allow them to ban curbside voting.

Summary: This case arose from the COVID-19 pandemic and centered on whether Alabama's ban on curbside voting violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by denying voters with disabilities equal access to in-person voting.

Conclusion: The Supreme Court granted the stay in an unsigned per curiam opinion, effectively reinstating Alabama's ban on curbside voting for the November 2020 election.

Legal Issue(s)

Accessibility
Voters' Rights

Applicable Law(s): Americans with Disabilities Act, First Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution

Region: Americas

Country: United States of America

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Oct 21, 2020

Geolocation

Latitude: 38.8906

Longitude: -77.0047

: Geolocation

Link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a67_3e04.pdf

Primary Documents

Merrill v. People First of Alabama.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Merrill v. People First of Alabama

Primary Documents

Notifications