In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - The Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 9 – Cameron Koffman wants to unseat Assemblyman Dan Quart on the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

 But Koffman most recently voted in Connecticut. Alongside a New York State lawsuit, two Koffman supporters are the named plaintiffs in a case against the New York City Board of Elections. 

 On May 7 a hearing was held before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Valerie E. Caproni. Inner City Press covered it, below.

 Now, the TRO has been re-requested: "Re: Tucker v. Bd. of Elections in the City of New York, No. 20-cv-03111 (VEC) Dear Judge Caproni:

On behalf of Plaintiffs in the above-referenced action, we write to request that the Court enter a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) directing the New York City Board of Elections (“NYCBOE”) to either (1) halt printing and distribution of ballots for the 73rd State Assembly District Democratic primary election, or (2) keep Cameron Koffman’s name on the ballot for the 73rd State Assembly District Democratic primary election, until further Order from this Court. Today, the New York County Supreme Court (Edmead, J.) granted Dan Quart’s summary judgment motion, declared Cameron Koffman ineligible to be a candidate for a Member of the Assembly from the 73rd Assembly District in the June 23, 2020 Democratic primary, and restrained the NYCBOE from placing Koffman’s name on the ballot for the primary. The court also denied Koffman’s request for a stay to preserve his right to appeal. Petitioners’ request for a TRO is now unquestionably ripe. As the NYCBOE explained to the Court yesterday, ballots are already being printed and sent to members of the military, and other absentee ballots are bring printed within days.

This Court’s immediate intervention is necessary to preserve the status quo and ensure that ballots are not distributed without Koffman’s name until this Court has the opportunity to consider Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. A TRO that gives the NYCBOE discretion to either stop printing and distributing ballots or continue distributing ballots so long as they include Koffman’s name does not prejudice Defendants.

Defendants have the option of either waiting for a decision on the merits or, if they are concerned about delay, printing and distributing ballots with Koffman’s name and, should the Court deny Petitioners’ preliminary injunction motion, disregarding any votes cast in his favor—something Defendants have conceded is possible. Therefore, for all the reasons set forth in Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion (Dkt. 27–31) and Plaintiffs’ letters to the Court of May 6, 2020 (Dkt. 37) and May 7, 2020 (Dkt. 39), Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant a TRO. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Richard D. Emery Samuel Shapiro Nick Bourland c. Stephen Kitzinger, Assistant Corporation Counsel, via email Steven H. Richman, General Counsel, NYCBOE, vie email Martin Connor, attorney for Dan Quart, via email N.Y.S. Office of the Attorney General, via email."

 From May 7: Judge Caproni asked the plaintiffs' lawyers, Are you conceding that Mr. Koffman will lose in state court? 

   The answer: No, it's that the plaintiffs want the opportunity to vote for Mr. Koffman. 

  Judge Caproni asked, So the last work is likely to be the Appellate Division, next week?  

 They answered that the Appellate Division has jurisdiction over facts, like the question of residency.  

  Judge Caproni said, Thanks for that lesson in appellate practice, it was not what I worked on. 

   Plaintiff's lawyer Richard Emery said, We will be back to this court if we have to, if you do not issue a TRO today. The absentee ballots will be critical since many will not come out. The critical moment is approaching, when absentee ballots are being printed.

 Defendants' (NYC's) lawyer Kitzinger said, Currently being printed are absentee ballots and *applications* for absentee ballots, of which 5 million will have to be mailed out.  

 Plaintiffs' lawyers cited SDNY Judge Analisa Torres decision "two days ago" - the Andrew Yang v Board of Ed case which Inner City Press covered. 

  Judge Caproni noted, New York law only allows you to have one electoral residence. And he voted in Connecticut.  

 The answer was, It's only that you can't vote in both places.  

At the end Judge Caproni ruled, "WHEREAS Plaintiffs did not dispute BOE's representations and acknowledged that, if the absentee ballots indeed name Mr. Koffman as a candidate, no emergency relief is required at this time; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED as moot, or, alternatively, for the lack of any injury. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate docket entry 33. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs must submit any supplemental authorities in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction, as set forth during the hearing, no later than 5:00 P.M. on May 7, 2020; Defendants' responses are due by May 9, 2020, at 5:00 P.M. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 5/7/2020)."

 Inner City Press will stay on the case, and on the issues. The case is Tucker et al v. Board of Elections, 20-cv-3111 (Caproni). 

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for