UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-81324-CIV-ALTMAN

REBA SHERRILL,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE FLORIDA ELECTIONS COMMISSION,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER 

On August 17, 2020, the Petitioner filed an Emergency Ex-Parte Petition for Writ of 

Mandamus against The Florida Elections Commission (the “F.E.C.”) (the “Petition” or “Pet.”) 

[ECF No. 1]. The Petitioner alleges that, “[o]n August 13, 2020 [she] filed a formal complaint with 

the F.E.C. concerning [Republican primary candidate Laura Loomer’s eligibility for congressional 

office] requesting the F.E.C. take action within 24 hours on an emergency basis.” Pet. at 2.

Dissatisfied with the pace at which the F.E.C. has responded (or failed to respond) to her complaint, 

the Petitioner seeks a drastic remedy. On the day before the primary—and before the F.E.C. has 

had the chance to adjudicate her complaint—the Petitioner asks this Court to enter an order 

“[d]irecting the [Florida Election Commission] to remove Ms. Loomer’s status as a candidate” and 

“[o]rder the Republican Party of Florida to conduct a special election with only candidates who 

are legally qualified to participate.” Id. at 6.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, district courts have “original jurisdiction of any action in the 

nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof

to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.” Whether to issue a writ of mandamus “is in large part a 

matter of discretion with the court to which the petition is addressed.” Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the 

Case 9:20-cv-81324-RKA Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/18/2020 Page 1 of 3
-2-

N. Dist. Of Cal., 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976). But “the writ will issue only in extraordinary 

circumstances,” id., and only to compel the performance of “a clear nondiscretionary duty.” 

Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602, 616 (1984). Before granting the extraordinary relief of 

mandamus, courts generally require petitioners to satisfy the following three elements: “(1) a clear 

right in the plaintiff to the relief sought; (2) a clear duty on the part of the defendant to do the act 

in question; and (3) no other adequate remedy available.” Carter v. Seamans, 411 F.2d 767, 774 

(5th Cir. 1969). “[A] writ of mandamus is intended to provide a remedy for a plaintiff only if he 

has exhausted all other avenues of relief and only if the defendant owes him a clear 

nondiscretionary duty.” Cash v. Barnhart, 327 F.3d 1252, 1258 (11th Cir. 2003) (cleaned up).

Here, however, the Court cannot address the merits of the Petition because the Court lacks 

subject-matter jurisdiction over this case. The F.E.C., after all, is not “an officer or employee of 

the United States or any agency thereof.” 28 U.S.C. § 1361. It is, rather, a state administrative 

agency that enforces the State of Florida’s election code. Because the Petitioner seeks “a writ of 

mandamus compelling action from state officials, not federal officials, the district court lack[s] 

jurisdiction to grant relief.” Lawrence v. Miami-Dade Cty. State Attorney’s Office, 272 F. App’x 

781 (11th Cir. 2008); see also Carnage v. Sanborn, 304 F. Supp. 857 (N.D. Ga. 1969) (holding

that 28 U.S.C. § 1361 “is not applicable to the instant case for the defendant here is a state rather 

than a federal employee”). The Petitioner, in short, must pursue redress in the state courts. 

***

Because the Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this case, the Court hereby

ORDERS AND ADJUDGES that the Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus [ECF 

No. 1] is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. Any other 

pending motions are DENIED as moot. All pending hearings and deadlines are TERMINATED. 

Case 9:20-cv-81324-RKA Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/18/2020 Page 2 of 3
DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 17th day of August 2020. 

_________________________________

ROY K. ALTMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 9:20-cv-81324-RKA Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/18/2020 Page 3 of 3