Miller et al. v. Blackwell et al., United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Judge Susan J. Dlott, October 27, 2004 [preventing elections boards in six Ohio counties from hearing challenges filed by the Ohio Republican Party against newly registered voters]. Excerpt:
The timing and manner in which the Defendants intend to send notice and conduct hearings regarding Plaintiff Voters' exercise of that right raise grave due process concerns. The Due Process Clause requires notice that is "reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections." Dusenbery v. United States, 534 U.S. 161, 168 (2002). The Defendants' intended timing and manner of sending notice is not reasonably calculated to apprise Plaintiff Voters of the hearing regarding the challenge to their registrations, nor to give them the opportunity to present their objections, as demonstrated by the individual situations of Plaintiffs Miller and Haddix. The notice here provides too little time for Plaintiff Voters' to receive the notice — if notice is received at all — given that it seems that Defendants ntend to send the notice to an address which has already been demonstrated to be faulty.
Additionally, the timing and manner in which Defendants intend to send notice may discourage Plaintiff Voters from exercising that fundamental right by leading them to believe that they are not eligible to vote.
Read the full text of the order here. Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here.