Wattleton v. Turner

Background

David Earl Wattleton, who represented himself, sued Luke Turner, identified in the opinion as the Olmsted County Election Commissioner. Wattleton alleged that Turner violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 52 U.S.C. § 10301, by failing to provide an absentee-ballot application and ballot while Wattleton was in federal custody.

The complaint alleged that Wattleton received an absentee ballot for the 2020 presidential general election. In January 2024, he asked the Olmsted County Election Division for an absentee-ballot application for the March 2024 federal primary caucus but did not receive one. In February 2024, a Bureau of Prisons official provided him with an application. Wattleton completed and mailed it to the Olmsted County Election Division but did not receive a ballot.

Wattleton sought a declaration that failing to notify him in time to correct a deficient or incomplete absentee-ballot application violated the Constitution’s due-process and equal-protection protections. He also sought an order preventing Turner from withholding absentee-ballot applications without giving him enough time to correct deficiencies before rejection.

Motion and legal standard

Turner moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim. The court generally treats the complaint’s factual allegations as true at this stage and asks whether they plausibly show an entitlement to relief.

The court also noted that Turner argued the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction and that the claims were moot. The court rejected the jurisdiction argument as a basis for dismissal because a lack of a private cause of action does not remove federal jurisdiction, and the court did not address mootness because it dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim.

Court’s analysis

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits certain voting practices or procedures that discriminate against protected groups. The court relied on an Eighth Circuit decision holding that private plaintiffs cannot sue under Section 2. A private right of action is a legal authorization for a private person to bring a lawsuit under a statute. Because Section 2 does not provide that authorization, the court concluded that Wattleton’s Section 2 claim could not proceed.

The court also addressed Wattleton’s reference to the National Voter Registration Act. The court explained that, unlike Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, that statute can provide a private right of action. But the complaint did not identify what action or failure to act violated the statute or which statutory requirement was violated. The complaint also did not allege compliance with the National Voter Registration Act’s notice requirements. The court therefore did not treat the complaint’s reference to that statute as stating a separate claim.

Disposition

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan granted Luke Turner’s Motion to Dismiss. The order states that David Earl Wattleton’s claims arising under 52 U.S.C. § 10301 were dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim, and judgment was to be entered accordingly.