Yang v. New York State Board of Elections
- Analisa Torres
- 1:20-cv-03325
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Yang v. New York State Board of Elections, Judge Torres ordered briefing on subject-matter jurisdiction and the Eleventh Amendment.
The plaintiffs and the New York State Board of Elections, whose briefs must address subject-matter jurisdiction and the Eleventh Amendment.
What happened
Yang v. New York State Board of Elections concerns the plaintiffs’ request for emergency relief against the New York State Board of Elections.
The court had directed the plaintiffs to file a supporting memorandum by April 30, 2020, and the Board to respond by May 1, 2020.
Judge Analisa Torres ordered both sides to address whether the court has power to hear the case, including the possible effect of the Eleventh Amendment. The order did not decide those questions or the request for emergency relief.
The detailed version
- Yang v. New York State Board of Elections · No. 1:20-cv-03325
- Analisa Torres
- Apr. 30, 2020
Background
Andrew Yang, Jonathan Herzog, Hellen Suh, Brian Vogel, Shlomo Small, Alison Hwang, Kristen Medeiros, and Dr. Roger Green sued the New York State Board of Elections individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The plaintiffs sought emergency relief. On April 29, 2020, the court directed the plaintiffs to submit a supporting memorandum by April 30 and the Board to respond by May 1.
Court’s Order
The court ordered the parties’ briefs to address subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court’s authority to hear the case. The briefs also had to address the possible effect of the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. The order did not resolve whether the court has jurisdiction, determine the Eleventh Amendment’s effect, or rule on the plaintiffs’ request for emergency relief.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.