Liu v. Hochul

Background

Lewis Y. Liu sued Kathleen Hochul, sued in her official capacity; the New York State Board of Elections; and its co-chairs Peter S. Kowsinski and Henry T Berger, also sued in their official capacities. Liu brought a facial constitutional challenge to New York’s winner-take-all system for allocating Electoral College votes. Under that system, the presidential candidate receiving the plurality of New York’s vote receives the state’s Electoral College votes.

Liu sought a declaration that the system was unconstitutional and an injunction preventing any state from using a winner-take-all system in future presidential elections. He alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses and the First Amendment. His central theory was that votes for candidates who lost New York had no effect on the allocation of Electoral College votes.

Defendants’ Motion

The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(1) concerns the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, including whether the plaintiff has standing. Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether the complaint states a legally sufficient claim for relief. The defendants argued that Liu’s alleged injury was generalized and could not be remedied by a court, and that the winner-take-all system did not violate the Constitution.

Standing

The court held that Liu had standing. It found that his alleged injury was concrete rather than merely abstract because, after the 2024 presidential election, his preferred candidate received no Electoral College votes despite receiving a substantial share of the vote in New York. The court also found the injury redressable because a court could determine whether the system was constitutional and, if necessary, prevent its use without ordering New York to adopt a particular replacement system.

Merits

The court nevertheless concluded that Liu failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). On the Equal Protection claim, the court relied on the Supreme Court’s summary affirmance in Williams v. Virginia State Board of Elections, which the court treated as controlling the one-person-one-vote challenge to a winner-take-all system. The court also noted that the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits had reached the same conclusion regarding similar challenges. Because Liu offered no reason for the court to depart from Williams, the Equal Protection claim failed.

The court said Liu’s First Amendment claim was based on the same assertion that his vote had been reduced to “zero value.” Although Liu labeled it a First Amendment claim, the court treated it as substantively identical to his Equal Protection claim and dismissed it for the same reason. The court expressly stated that it was not deciding whether a differently formulated First Amendment challenge might be viable.

The court also rejected Liu’s Due Process claim. It found that New York election law expressly describes how the state’s Electoral College votes are allocated. It further found that Liu cited no authority establishing that the federal Due Process Clause requires an election system or Electoral College allocation method to be specifically described in the federal Constitution. The court treated this claim as essentially the same as the Equal Protection claim.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion and close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.