Previous 18 / 48 Next

-8- Nos. 56 & 58 individual’s candidacy for election were modified during this time to further this policy. The ultimate purpose of truncating the political calendar for the June 2020 primary was therefore to protect the safety and well-being of candidates, their staff and the general public by ensuring all persons could limit interactions with other individuals who may be sick. Furthermore, during this critical period in which relatively little was known about COVID-19 and all efforts were geared towards “flattening the curve,”2 the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) issued guidance on quarantine protocols for COVID19, classifying individuals who have been “in close contact (6 ft.) with someone who is positive, whether or not displaying symptoms for COVID-19” as persons who should mandatorily quarantine (2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Interim Containment Guidance: Precautionary Quarantine, Mandatory Quarantine and Mandatory Isolation Applicable to all Local Health Departments (LHD), New York State Department of Health [March 9, 2020], https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2020/03/quarantine_guidance_ 0.pdf)3. Anyone displaying symptoms of COVID-19 was also required to stay inside and The phrase “flattening the curve” refers to slowing the spread of an illness during an epidemic such that the number of infections is spread out over time so that medical resources and staff are not overwhelmed (see Siobhan Roberts, Flattening the Coronavirus Curve, New York Times [March 27, 2020], https://www.nytimes.com/article/flattencurve-coronavirus.html). If a community does not act to mitigate the virus’s spread, the result is often a steep rise and fall in cases, which leads to a sharp curve on a graph (id.). With mitigation, the number of cases is more consistent over time, showing a flatter curve on a graph (id.). 3 According to the NYSDOH website, this document was first issued on March 9, 2020 (see “Travel, Large Gatherings and Quarantines,” New York State Department of Health, 2 -8-

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Seawright v. Board of Elections & In re Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether late filings during the COVID-9 pandemic constitute unique circumstances that would permit remedy of the fatal defect when otherwise not provide in law.

Alleged Acts: On March 19, 2020 Seawright filed a petition for candidacy for the 76th Assembly District on the Democratic Party primary ballot. The petition itself consisted of more than ten pages and a coversheet was required for both. Seawright failed to file the coversheet by the March 20th deadline. Similarly, on March 19, 2020 Seawright filed a petition for the exact same office under the Working Families Party. This petition required a certificate accepting the designation because Seawright did not belong to that political party. Seawright failed to meet the march 24th deadline for this filing. The City Board invalidated both petitions based on the failure to file the required documents. On March 20, 2020 Hawatmeh filed a petition as a Conservative Party Member for the 19th Congressional District. From March 20-March 24, 2020 Hawatmeh was out of town for a prescheduled cancer treatment. Hawatmeh was not a member of the Conservative Party and was accordingly required to file a certificate accepting the designation. Hawatmeh failed to file by the March 24th deadline and the State Board designated the petition invalid.

Procedural history: The First Appellate Division determined that the COVID-9 pandemic presented unique circumstance and that the late filing of a cover sheet and certificate of acceptance was not a constitute fatal defect. However, the Third Appellate Division reached the opposite verdict in In re Hawatmeh v. New York State Board of Elections.

Summary: New York’s Electoral Code requires that any failure to file “shall be a fatal defect.” The court mandates often upheld these strict deadlines, despite the circumstances of the potential candidate. The court stated that COVID-19 has impacted many candidates and although many legislative directives have been relaxed, the candidates must still timely file. The court state that the legislature must be the party to create exception to the law, should it need them, not the judicial system. Further, the cover sheets and firm could be submitted by an agent, so even if Seawright and Hawatmeh were unable, the forms could be filed by members of the campaigns. Alternatively, Executive Order 202.7 permitted audio-visual technology or mailed to the Board of Elections. More than 1,000 petitions were timely filed, many of whom experienced the same of similar circumstances.

Conclusion: The Court of Appeals reversed Seawright and affirmed Hawatmeh.

Legal Issue(s)

Candidate Registration
Health Concerns & Election Administration

Applicable Law(s): NYCRR 6215.1 [b]&[e}

Region: Americas

Country: United States of America

Language of Decision

English

Court: Appellate Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: May 21, 2020

Geolocation

Latitude: 40.73592033063037

Longitude: -73.99396234616334

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Seawright v. Board of Elections.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Seawright v. Board of Elections & In re Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

Primary Documents

Notifications