Skip Navigation

Suggested Results

    See All Search Results
    Court Case Tracker

    Ohio A. Philip Randolph Inst. v. Householder

    A group of plaintiffs is challenging Ohio’s 2011 congressional plan as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.

    Last Updated: February 10, 2020
    Published: August 13, 2019

    Note: The Brennan Center is not a participant in this case.

    Case Background

    The Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute, the League of Women Voters of Ohio, and a group of Ohio residents filed suit contenting Ohio’s 2011 congressional map is an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment and Article I of the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs argue the map was intentionally designed to give Republicans an 12–4 advantage in congressional seats and entrench that advantage over the course of the decade. This skewed partisan advantage, the suit argues, prevents large segments of Ohio’s voters from having their votes meaningfully reflected in their congressional delegation.

    On August 15, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, permitting the plaintiffs to proceed on all of their claims. 

    On August 16, the panel permitted members of the Republican congressional delegation, Ohio voters, and Republican party organizations to intervene in the case. The case went to trial on March 4, 2019.

    On May 3, 2019, the court struck down the congressional plan as unconstitutional and ordered the legislature to draw a remedial map by June 14. 

    On May 6, 2019, both the defendants and intervenors appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. On May 24, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the defendants’ and the intervenors’ applications to stay the remedial mapdrawing process pending appeal.

    On June 3, 2019, the intervenors appealed two discovery-related orders to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit: (1) an order granting plaintiffs’ motion to compel compliance with subpoenas, and (2) an order denying intervenors’ motion for a protective order. Oral argument took place January 29, 2020. On February 5, the Sixth Circuit issued a per curiam opinion dismissing the appeal as moot and vacating the orders in question.

    On October 7, the Supreme Court vacated the lower court’s judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings in light of the Court’s ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause dismissing partisan gerrymandering claims as non-justiciable by federal courts.

    Documents

    District Court

    U.S. Supreme Court 

    Defendants’ Appeal

    Emergency Application for Stay (Docket No. 18A1165)

    Application for Extension of Time to File Jurisdictional Statement (Docket No. 18A1242)

    Jurisdictional Briefing (Docket No. 19–70)

    Intervenor-Defendants’ Appeal

    Emergency Application for Stay (Docket No. 18A1166)

    Application for Extension of Time to File Jurisdictional Statement (Docket No. 18A1288)

    Jurisdictional Briefing (Docket No. 19–110)

    Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (intervenors’ appeal of motion to compel and motion for protective order)