[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advanc e sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose , Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-1253.]

NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to f ormal revision before it is pu blished in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are reques ted to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohi o, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published.

S LIP O PINION N O
. 2020-O HIO -1253
T HE S TATE EX REL
. O HIO D EMOCRATIC P ARTY ET AL
. v . L A R OSE , S ECY
. [Until this opinion appears in t he Ohio Official Reports advanc e sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose , Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-1253.] Writ of prohibition sought to invalidat e Secretary of Stat e Directive 2020-06 and to establish procedures for completing the 2020 primary election— Subsequent actions by secretary of state and General Assembly rendered
the cause moot—Cause dismissed. (No. 2020-0388—Submitted Marc h 27, 2020—Decided March 31, 2020. )
I N P ROHIBITION

.

__________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Just after 10:00 p.m. on Monday, March 16, 2020, the director o f the Ohio Department of Health issued an order closing polling place s in Ohio “to avoid the imminent threat * * * of widespread exposure to COVID-19,” a contagious respiratory disease that can result in serious illness or death . The same night thatS UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

2 order was issued, respondent, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, issued Directive 2020-06, which purported to extend absentee voting through June 1 and set June 2 as the date for in-person voting at polling places. In-person vot ing in Ohio’s primary election did not take place on March 17 as scheduled. {¶ 2} On March 17, relators, the Ohio Democratic Party and Kiara Dian e Sanders (collectively, “the Democratic Party”), filed this expe dited election case seeking a writ of prohibition to invalidate Directive 2020-06. The Democratic Party also asked for an order that would, among other things, allow v oters to cast absentee ballots through late April. On March 20, we allowed the Libert arian Party of Ohio to intervene as a relator. The Libertarian Party, too, asks us to invalidate Directive 2020-06, and it seeks to extend absentee voting into May. {¶ 3} The Democratic Party asked us to dismiss this case after the Ge neral Assembly passed 2020 Am.Sub.H.B . No. 197 (“House Bill 197”)—an emergency act that voids Directive 2020-06 and establishes how the primar y election will proceed, House Bill 197 at Sections 32 and 40. We granted the Democratic Party’s application and dismissed its complaint on March 27. __ Ohio S t.3d __, 2020-Ohio1139, __ N.E.3d __. The Libertarian Party’s complaint remained pending. {¶ 4} On March 26, after the deadline for filing evidence had passed, the secretary of state filed supplemental evidence suggesting that the Libertarian Party’s complaint is moot. See Pewitt v. Lorain Corr. Inst. , 64 Ohio St.3d 470, 472, 597 N.E.2d 92 (1992) (“an event that causes a case to become moot m ay be proved by extrinsic evidence outside the record”). The new evidence is a March 26 e-mail in which the secretary of state’s director of elections informs co unty elections boards that House Bill 197 alters the primary-election schedule and th at the secretary of state rescinded Directive 2020-06. The governor signed House Bill 19 7 into law on March
27. {¶ 5} “ A ‘case is moot when the issues presented are no longer “live ” or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.’ ” State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc.January Term, 2020

3 v. Goodenow , 125 Ohio St.3d 407, 2010-Ohio-1844, 928 N.E.2d 728, ¶ 10, quo ting
Powell v. McCormack , 395 U.S. 486, 496, 89 S.Ct. 1944, 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969). A case becomes moot when something happens that makes it impossib le for the court to grant the requested relief. Id

. {¶ 6} In its complaint, the Libertarian Party first asks for an order requiring the secretary of state to rescind Directive 2020-06. The secre tary of state’s own action rescinding that directive—along with the General Assembl y’s action voiding it—clearly renders this aspect o f the Libertarian Party’s compl aint moot. {¶ 7} The Libertarian Party also asks us to, by way of an order direc ted at the secretary of state, tell county elections boards how they must conduct the primary election. The Libertarian Party alleges that we have authority to grant such relief “[i]n the absence of immediate guidance from and action by the Ohio General Assembly.” Now that the General Assembly has acted and the gov ernor has signed House Bill 197 into law, this aspect of the Libertarian Party’s complaint is moot as
well. {¶ 8} In its reply brief, the Libertarian Party argues that House Bil l 197 violates federal law (and thus does not render its claim moot). If the Libertarian Party wants to challenge what the General Assembly has done in House Bill 197, that claim is for another day and another case. {¶ 9} In short, the Libertarian Party asks us to invalidate Directive 2020-06 and establish procedures for completing the 2020 primary electi on. Subsequent actions by the secretary of state and the General Assembly have rendered those requests moot. We therefore dis miss the Libertarian Party’s co mplaint.
Cause dismissed.
O’C ONNOR , C.J., and K ENNEDY , F ISCHER , D ONNELLY , and S TEWART , JJ.,

concur. F RENCH and D E W INE , JJ., not participating.

_________________S UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

4 Mark R. Brown for intervening relator. Dave Yost, Attorney General, and Bridget C. Coontz and Julie M. Pfeiffer, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent. Sarah A. Hill, Julie Keys, and Kevin J. Truitt, for amicus curi ae Disability Rights Ohio. Mayle, L.L.C., Andrew R. Mayle, and Ronald J. Mayle, for amici curiae Corey Speweik, Tracy Overmyer, Gary Click, Cynthia Welty, Tim S altzman, and Liamer Media, L.L.C. American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation, Freda Levens on, and David J. Carey; and Demos and Naila S. Awan, for amici curiae t he League of
Women Voters of Ohio and the Ohi o A. Philip Randolph Institute. Phillips & Co., L.P.A., and Gerald W. Phillips, in support of r espondent for amici curiae Gerald W. Phillips and the Ohio Citizens for Hones ty, Integrity, and Openness in Government, Ltd. Isaac, Wiles, Burkholder & Teetor, L.L.C., Donald C. Brey, and Matthew R. Aumann, for amicus curiae State Representative Jason Stephens.

_________________