Overby v. Simon

Background

Paula M. Overby sued Steve Simon, in his official capacity as Minnesota Secretary of State, and Timothy Walz, in his official capacity as Minnesota Governor. Overby alleged that she replaced Adam Weeks as the Legal Marijuana Now Party’s candidate for Minnesota’s Second Congressional District after Weeks died. She sought declarations and injunctions concerning Minnesota’s nominee-vacancy law, including an order requiring a February 2021 special election and an order directing the Secretary of State to register her candidacy.

The opinion explains that an earlier case brought by Angela Craig and Jenny Winslow Davies resulted in a preliminary injunction on October 9, 2020. That injunction concluded that Craig and Davies were likely to succeed on their claim that Minnesota’s nominee-vacancy law was preempted, meaning displaced, by federal law. The Eighth Circuit and this court denied requests to stay the injunction, and the Supreme Court denied an emergency request to stay it.

Craig and Davies then moved to intervene in Overby’s case. Craig was a candidate for the congressional seat, and Davies was a voter in the district who had cast her ballot in the 2020 election. They sought intervention as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) and, alternatively, permissive intervention under Rule 24(b). No party opposed the motion.

Standing

The court first considered Article III standing, which requires a person seeking to participate in a federal lawsuit to show an actual or imminent injury, a connection between that injury and the challenged conduct, and a court remedy that could address the injury.

The court found that Craig and Davies had shown an injury in fact. If Overby obtained the requested relief, Craig and Davies could be harmed in their interests in having the election occur on November 3, 2020, the date set by federal law, and in having Minnesota’s Second Congressional District maintain continuous representation in the House of Representatives.

The court also found causation because, if the earlier preliminary injunction were lifted, the Secretary of State would be required to enforce Minnesota’s nominee-vacancy law, causing the injuries Craig and Davies identified. The court found redressability because keeping the preliminary injunction in place would prevent those injuries. The court therefore concluded that Craig and Davies had standing.

Intervention as of Right

Intervention as of right requires a timely motion, an interest related to the case, a risk that resolving the case would impair the applicant’s ability to protect that interest, and inadequate representation by the existing parties.

The court found the motion timely because Craig and Davies filed it two days after Overby filed her complaint, while the case was still at an early stage. Craig’s candidacy and Davies’s status as a voter who had cast a ballot gave each of them an interest related to the case. The court also found that the short period before the general election created a limited opportunity for them to protect their interests in having the election occur on the date set by federal law.

Finally, the court determined that Craig’s interests as a candidate and Davies’s interests as a voter could be separate from those of the Secretary of State and Governor. The existing defendants therefore did not adequately represent all of Craig’s and Davies’s interests.

Disposition

The court held that Craig and Davies qualified for intervention as party defendants under Rule 24(a)(2). Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright granted their joint motion to intervene, Docket 19. This order decided only whether they could join the case; it did not decide Overby’s underlying requests for relief.