Overby v. Simon

Background

Paula M. Overby alleged that she replaced Adam Weeks as the Legal Marijuana Now Party’s candidate for Minnesota’s Second Congressional District after Weeks died on September 21, 2020. She sought injunctive relief, declaratory relief, costs, disbursements, and attorneys’ fees. The defendants were Steve Simon, in his official capacity as Minnesota Secretary of State, and Timothy Walz, in his official capacity as Governor of Minnesota.

The defendants 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. They argued that Overby’s claims were moot and that the relief she sought conflicted with the Eighth Circuit’s decision in a prior related proceeding.

Mootness

The defendants argued that the case was moot because the House of Representatives had seated Representative Angela Craig after the November 2020 general election. A case is moot when a court can no longer provide effective relief. The court agreed that it knew of no authority allowing it to order the requested special election or registration of Overby’s candidacy after the House had seated Representative Craig, and Overby cited no such authority.

The court nevertheless denied the motion to dismiss on mootness grounds. Overby also sought a declaration that Minnesota could hold a special election, and the court concluded that it could grant that declaratory relief if warranted. The availability of that possible partial remedy meant the case was not entirely moot.

Failure to State a Claim

The court then considered whether Overby’s requested relief was legally available. Federal law, 2 U.S.C. § 7, establishes the date for elections of members of the United States House of Representatives. The court explained that the Constitution’s Elections Clause allows Congress to override conflicting state election rules.

Minnesota’s Nominee Vacancy Statute provides that when a major-party congressional candidate dies after the statutory deadline before a general election, officials may not certify the vote totals and must hold a special election the following February. The court held that this state law conflicted with the federal election date established by 2 U.S.C. § 7. Because federal law preempts conflicting state law, the Minnesota statute could not support Overby’s requested special election.

The court also rejected Overby’s reliance on federal cases involving runoff elections. It explained that those cases involved a general election held on the federally required date that resulted in a failure to elect, while Minnesota’s statute would create that result by preventing certification of the vote totals. The court further concluded that the death of a candidate, without more, was not an emergency circumstance allowing Minnesota to avoid the federal election-date requirement.

Disposition

The court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Its order separately denied the motion to dismiss on mootness grounds and stated that the case was dismissed with prejudice. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright directed that judgment be entered accordingly.