Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiffs’ request for issuance of preliminary injunction, alleging that Indiana’s law (“Act 442“), which allowed State to immediately remove voters based on information received from third-party database, rather than in response to direct contact with voters violated National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Plaintiffs-non-profit organizations had standing to bring instant action, where plaintiffs established that they would suffer concrete and particularized injury in terms of diverted limited resources that they would be forced to use to correct erroneous voter removal, which had “real-world” impact on their specific core missions. Moreover, plaintiffs established likelihood of success on merits of case, since new process under Act 442 for removing voters would not comport with NVRA, because Act 442 improperly omits any requirement that State have direct contact with voter prior to voter’s removal. Ct. further noted that accuracy or lack thereof of State’s information concerning voter’s change in residence made no difference under NVRA, and mere fact that voter registered in different state did not constitute evidence that said voter requested removal from Indiana’s voter roll.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Election Law