CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 1

Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines 

Because of a Hurricane 

Florida Democratic Party v. Scott (4:16-cv-626) and 

League of Women Voters of Florida v. Scott (4:16-cv-633) 

(Mark E. Walker, N.D. Fla.) and Georgia Coalition 

for the Peoples’ Agenda v. Deal (4:16-cv-269) and Bethea 

v. Deal (2:16-cv-140) (William T. Moore, Jr., S.D. Ga.) 

District judges in Florida and Georgia extended voter registration by 

one week in advance of the 2016 general election because of evacuations and government office closings resulting from Hurricane Matthew. In Florida, the judge extended the deadline statewide; in Georgia, the judge extended the deadline only for one county, because 

only offices in that county did not open again after the hurricane until after the original deadline. 

Subject: Registration procedures. Topics: Registration 

procedures; intervention; case assignment; recusal. 

In October 2016, federal judges in Florida and Georgia extended voter-registration deadlines by one week because of Hurricane Matthew. A North Carolina state judge also extended voter-registration in some counties.1

Florida 

“Nearly eight million Floridians, not counting tourists, sat in [Hurricane] 

Matthew’s potential path under hurricane or tropical storm warnings. A halfmillion were urged to evacuate their homes.”2

 So the Miami Herald reported 

on October 6, 2016.3 Two days later, the Herald reported, “More than a million 

statewide lost power.”4

On Sunday, October 9, the Florida Democratic Party filed a federal complaint in the Northern District of Florida against Florida’s governor and Florida’s secretary of state, seeking an extension of at least a week from the October 

1. Court Extends Voter Registration in 37 Counties, www.ncsbe.gov/Elections/HurricaneMatthew/Press-Release-10-14-2016, archived at web.archive.org/web/20161202232048/www. 

ncsbe.gov/Elections/Hurricane-Matthew/Press-Release-10-14-2016; see Lynn Bonner, NC 

Voter Registration Deadline Extended in 36 Counties, Raleigh News & Observer, Oct. 14, 2016. 

2. Jacqueline Charles, Mimi Whitefield & Jenny Staletovich, Bracing for Matthew, Miami 

Herald, Oct. 6, 2016, at 1A. 

3. Id. 

4. Glenn Garvin, More Than a Million Statewide Lost Power, Miami Herald, Oct. 8, 2016, 

at 4A; see also Jenny Staletovich, Mary Ellen Klas, Nancy San Martin & Jay Weaver, Storm 

Surge Becomes Biggest Threat, Miami Herald, Oct. 8, 2016, at 1A (“Hurricane Matthew saved 

its worst Florida lashing for last as its eyewall skirted the state’s northeastern coastline on Friday, whipping up pounding waves and surging tides that washed over beachfront communities.”). 
Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines Because of a Hurricane 

2 Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 

11 deadline for voter registration in light of the hurricane.5 With its complaint, 

the party filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.6

The court assigned the case to Judge Mark E. Walker, who learned he had 

it on Columbus Day, the day after the case was filed, when Judge Walker performed his customary morning docket check.7

 He had intended to go into the 

office on the federal holiday anyway, but because of the filing he asked a law 

clerk to join him.8

Judge Walker included a temporary restraining order in a sixteen-page 

opinion issued on October 10 and posted to the docket from home by Judge 

Walker’s courtroom deputy.9 Judge Walker found that the secretary of state 

was a proper defendant as Florida’s chief election officer, but the governor was 

not, because although Florida law gave the governor the power to reschedule 

an election in case of emergency, it did not give him the power to extend the 

deadline for voter registration.10 Judge Walker extended the deadline for registration until 5:00 p.m. on October 12 and scheduled a preliminary-injunction hearing for 10:00 a.m. on October 12.11 He concluded, “Quite simply, it is 

wholly irrational in this instance for Florida to refuse to extend the voter registration deadline when the state already allows the Governor to suspend or 

move the election date due to an unforeseen emergency.”12

Judge Walker granted intervention motions on October 11 to (1) Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and the New Florida Majority13 and (2) a prospective citizen whose citizenship ceremony was postponed to October 15 because 

of the hurricane.14 Judge Walker was able to grant intervention motions 

5. Complaint, Fla. Democratic Party v. Scott, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 9, 2016), D.E. 

3; see Transcript at 7, id. (Oct. 12, 2016, filed Oct. 16, 2016), D.E. 31 [hereinafter Fla. Democratic Party Transcript]; see also Steve Bousquet, Democrats Sue Scott Over Voter Registration 

Deadline, Miami Herald, Oct. 10, 2016, at 6A; Patricia Mazzei & Kristen M. Clark, Florida 

Says No to Clinton Request for More Days to Register to Vote, Miami Herald, Oct. 7, 2016, at 

5A. 

6. Temporary-Restraining-Order Motion, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. 

Fla. Oct. 9, 2016), D.E. 4. 

7. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016. 

Tim Reagan interviewed Judge Walker for this report by telephone. 

8. Id. 

9. Fla. Democratic Party v. Scott, 215 F. Supp. 3d 1250 (N.D. Fla. 2016); see Steve Bousquet, 

Judge Extends Voter Registration Deadline, Rebukes State for “Irrational” Decision, Miami Herald, Oct. 11, 2016, at 2A. 

10. Fla. Democratic Party, 215 F. Supp. 3d at 1254–55; see Steve Bousquet, Reversing Scott, 

Federal Judge Could Reshape Florida Election, Miami Herald, Oct. 12, 2016, at 8A; see also

Steve Bousquet, Judge Extends Florida’s Voter Sign-Up Deadline, Miami Herald, Oct. 13, 2016, 

at 1A [hereinafter Judge Extends Deadline] (“Had [the governor] extended the deadline, the 

judge said in court [at the preliminary-injunction hearing], the action likely would have been 

challenged.”). 

11. Fla. Democratic Party, 215 F. Supp. 3d at 1259. 

12. Id. at 1257. 

13. Order, Fla. Democratic Party v. Scott, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 

20; see Intervention Motion, id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 18. 

14. Order, id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 25; see Intervention Motion, id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 

22. 
Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines Because of a Hurricane 

Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 3

quickly because his law clerk checked the docket for filings frequently during 

the emergency litigation.15

On October 12, Judge Walker consolidated the case with an October 11 

action by the League of Women Voters to extend voter registration until October 18.16 The court originally assigned the case to Judge Robert L. Hinkle, 

who ordered it reassigned to Judge Walker as related to the Democratic Party’s 

action.17

At the October 12 hearing, “Defendants took no position.”18 Some parties 

appeared by telephone, and members of the news media were permitted to 

listen but not record the proceeding.19

A fan of Federal Rule of Evidence 614’s provision for a judge calling and 

examining a witness, Judge Walker wanted testimony from a county supervisor of elections, and he had the clerk’s office arrange for the local supervisor 

to appear.20 The witness waived service of a subpoena.21

Leon County’s supervisor of elections testified “that storms of this magnitude impose ‘tremendous strain’ on elections offices.”22 With a three-page 

opinion, Judge Walker extended the voter-registration deadline to October 

18.23 On October 13, he ordered the parties to notify the court by October 14 

“if they wish to seek further action in this case.”24

15. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016. 

16. Order, League of Women Voters of Florida v. Scott, No. 4:16-cv-633 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 

12, 2016), D.E. 15; see Preliminary-Injunction Motion, id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 4; Complaint, 

id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 1. 

It was unclear why the League filed a separate action instead of intervening in the pending 

case. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016. 

17. Order, League of Women Voters of Florida, No. 4:16-cv-633 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 11, 2016), 

D.E. 14; see Notice of a Prior or Similar Case, id. (Oct. 11, 2016), D.E. 3. 

18. Opinion, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 12, 2016), D.E. 29 

[hereinafter Fla. Democratic Party Preliminary-Injunction Opinion]; Fla. Democratic Party

Transcript, supra note 5, at 8. 

19. Fla. Democratic Party Transcript, supra note 5, at 1–4. 

20. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016; see Fla. Democratic Party Transcript, supra note 5, at 22–25; Minutes, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 

12, 2016), D.E. 28. 

21. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016.

22. Fla. Democratic Party Preliminary-Injunction Opinion, supra note 18, at 2 n.2; Fla. 

Democratic Party Transcript, supra note 5, at 24. 

23. Fla. Democratic Party Preliminary-Injunction Opinion, supra note 18, at 3 (“Hopefully 

it is not lost on anyone that the right to have a voice is why this great country exists in the first 

place.”); see Steve Bousquet, Judge Extends Deadline, supra note 10; Jonathan Drew, Judge Orders Storm-Ravaged Counties to Extend Voter Registration Deadlines, Miami Herald, Oct. 15, 

2016, at 18A; William Wan, Matthew Victims’ New Challenge: Getting to Vote, Wash. Post, 

Oct. 13, 2016, at A2; Michael Wines, Florida Voter Registration Extended After Storm, N.Y. 

Times, Oct. 13, 2016, at A12. 

24. Order, League of Women Voters of Florida v. Scott, No. 4:16-cv-633 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 

13, 2016), D.E. 18; Order, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 13, 2016), 

D.E. 30. 
Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines Because of a Hurricane 

4 Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 

On October 18, the Democratic Party filed a motion to enforce the injunction, claiming that “[w]ithin days, Plaintiff began receiving reports that Florida state and local election officials have indicated that they are unlikely to 

complete the verification process for all voter registration applications before 

early voting begins in many counties on October 24.”25 The party sought a 

complete list of all registered voters, with weekly updates for registrations verified after October 23.26 The secretary argued that the “baseless” motion 

“should be rejected out of hand.”27

Judge Walker granted motions by the Republican Party28 and Florida’s 

senate29 to intervene in opposition to the Democratic Party’s motion, and 

Judge Walker granted a motion to appear as an amicus curiae filed by the 

state’s Association of Supervisors of Elections, which sought participation so 

that any remedy imposed by the court would be informed by the association’s 

expertise.30

At an October 20 hearing, Judge Walker received testimony from the supervisor of elections for Hillsborough County, the county that includes 

Tampa.31 Judge Walker wanted testimony from a witness with experience in 

one of Florida’s four largest counties.32

Judge Walker denied the enforcement motion.33 Realizing the importance 

of monitoring orders as well as issuing them,34 however, Judge Walker “asked 

[the defendant] to keep a running tally on the Florida Department of State 

website tabulating the number of pending voter-registration applications and 

the number of processed voter-registration applications.”35 Noting a slowdown in application processing and concluding that “almost 25,000 voters 

may or may not have their vote counted in the 2016 General Election,” Judge 

Walker ordered Florida’s secretary of state to present a witness on October 28 

25. Enforcement Motion, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2016), 

D.E. 32 [hereinafter Fla. Democratic Party Enforcement Motion]; see Steve Bousquet, Hurricane Matthew Ripple Effect: Big Changes to the Florida Voter Rolls, Miami Herald, Oct. 20, 

2016, at 1A. 

26. Fla. Democratic Party Enforcement Motion, supra note 25, at 2–3. 

27. Motion Opposition, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 19, 2016), 

D.E. 44. 

28. Order, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 49; see Intervention Motion, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 

47. 

29. Order, id. (Oct. 20, 2016), D.E. 51; see Intervention Motion, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 

50. 

30. Order, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 45; see Amicus Curiae Motion, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 

38. 

31. Minutes, id. (Oct. 20, 2016), D.E. 52. 

32. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016 (noting also that comments to news 

media following the earlier hearing by Leon County’s supervisor of elections made him less 

desirable as a witness). 

33. Order, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2016), D.E. 54; see

Steve Bousquet, Judge Rejects Democrats’ Request to Speed Fla. Voter Verification, Miami Herald, Oct. 21, 2016, at 3A. 

34. Interview with Hon. Mark E. Walker, Oct. 31, 2016. 

35. Order at 2, Fla. Democratic Party, No. 4:16-cv-626 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 27, 2016), D.E. 57. 
Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines Because of a Hurricane 

Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 5

to testify at a telephonic hearing about Florida’s ability to process voter-registration applications.36

Georgia 

Georgia’s voter-registration deadline was October 11 also.37 Late at night on 

October 12, three organizations promoting voter registration filed a federal 

complaint against Georgia’s governor and Georgia’s secretary of state in the 

Southern District of Georgia’s Savannah courthouse, seeking an extension of 

the voter-registration deadline for residents of Chatham County, Georgia’s 

seaside county on the South Carolina border that includes Savannah.38 In their 

complaint, the plaintiffs observed, “Chatham County government offices, 

which opened today, were last open on Wednesday, October 5.”39 With their 

complaint, the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion for a preliminary injunction.40

On Thursday, October 13, Judge William T. Moore, Jr., the only district 

judge sitting in Savannah, set the case for hearing at 10:00 a.m. on the following day and ordered the clerk of court to serve defendants with copies of the 

case’s electronically filed papers.41 Judge Moore would have held the hearing 

on Thursday afternoon, but lawyers for both sides were in Atlanta, and the 

lawyers requested a Friday morning proceeding.42

Following the October 14 hearing, Judge Moore extended the voter-registration deadline in the county by one week.43

While this Court harbors significant reservations concerning the ultimate merits 

of Plaintiffs’ claims, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have established a sufficient 

likelihood of success to warrant injunctive relief. An individual’s ability to participate 

in local and national elections is arguably the most cherished right enshrined in our 

constitution. Indeed, our founding fathers felt so strongly about their right to participate in the electoral process that when deprived of it they took up arms against their 

sovereign, risking life and home for over eight years, to obtain that right. 

36. Id. at 2–4; Fla. Democratic Party Transcript, id. (Oct. 28, 2016, filed Oct. 31, 2016), D.E. 

60 (noting that Judge Walker was presiding from another city because he was conducting a 

trial there); see Steve Bousquet, Judge Fears 25,000 Voters Won’t Be Eligible for Election, Miami 

Herald, Oct. 28, 2016, at 5A. 

37. 2016 Elections and Voter Registration Calendar, sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/2016_ 

election_dates, archived at web.archive.org/web/20161225210158/sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/ 

2016_election_dates. 

38. Complaint, Ga. Coal. for the People’s Agenda, Inc. v. Deal, No. 4:16-cv-269 (S.D. Ga. 

Oct. 12, 2016), D.E. 1 [hereinafter Ga. Coal. for the People’s Agenda, Inc. Complaint]; see Kristina Torres, Registration Deadline Hearing Set, Atlanta J.-Const., Oct. 14, 2016, at 1B. 

39. Ga. Coal. for the People’s Agenda, Inc. Complaint, supra note 38, at 2. 

40. Preliminary-Injunction Motion, Ga. Coal. for the People’s Agenda, Inc., No. 4:16-cv269 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 12, 2016), D.E. 2. 

41. Order, id. (Oct. 13, 2016), D.E. 6; see Minutes, id. (Oct. 14, 2016), D.E. 12; see also 

Torres, supra note 38. 

Tim Reagan interviewed Judge Moore for this report by telephone on October 31, 2016. 

42. Interview with Hon. William T. Moore, Jr., Oct. 31, 2016. 

43. Ga. Coal. for the Peoples’ Agenda, Inc. v. Deal, 214 F. Supp. 3d 1344 (S.D. Ga. 2016); 

see Drew, supra note 23; Aaron Gould Sheinin, County Told to Reopen Voter Signup, Atlanta 

J.-Const., Oct. 15, 2016, at 1A. 
Extending Voter-Registration Deadlines Because of a Hurricane 

6 Federal Judicial Center 10/26/2023 

In the final analysis, Defendants may not be under any obligation to provide 

Chatham County residents with an extension. Only time will tell. What is clear to the 

Court, however, is that granting the extension would have been the right thing to 

do.44

On October 17, an organization and a prospective voter filed a federal 

complaint in the Southern District of Georgia’s Brunswick courthouse against 

the governor and the secretary of state seeking a reopening of voter registration statewide.45 With their complaint, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.46

Judge Lisa Godbey Wood, the only district judge sitting in Brunswick—

the county seat of the coastal Glynn County—was in Athens for the week 

teaching a seminar at the University of Georgia.47 She asked Judge Moore if he 

would take the case. 48 On October 18, Judge Moore set the case for hearing on 

the following day.49 The parties agreed to a Savannah hearing.50

Following an October 19 hearing, Judge Moore denied relief in the second 

case, observing, “While all other counties were able to open their [Board of 

Elections] offices prior to the registration deadline, the Chatham County 

[Board of Elections] office did not reopen until October 12, [the day after the 

original registration deadline].”51 Judge Moore accepted a voluntary dismissal 

of the second case on November 152 and a stipulated dismissal of the first case 

on March 15, 2017.53

Discussion in both cases highlighted hurricane difficulties in Georgia’s six 

coastal counties, but the evidence supported relief only for Chatham County 

in the first case and for no additional counties in the second case.54 Litigation 

in both cases was stronger on argument than on evidence.55

44. Ga. Coal. for the Peoples’ Agenda, Inc., 214 F. Supp. 3d at 1345. 

45. Complaint, Bethea v. Deal, No. 2:16-cv-140 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 17, 2016), D.E. 1; see 

Amended Complaint, id. (Oct. 18, 2016), D.E. 10. 

46. Temporary-Restraining-Order Motion, id. (Oct. 17, 2016), D.E. 2. 

47. Interview with Hon. William T. Moore, Jr., Oct. 31, 2016. 

48. Id.; see Recusal Order, Bethea, No. 2:16-cv-140 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 18, 2016), D.E. 8.

49. Order, Bethea, No. 2:16-cv-140 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 18, 2016), D.E. 9. 

50. Interview with Hon. William T. Moore, Jr., Oct. 31, 2016. 

51. Opinion at 2, Bethea, No. 2:16-cv-140 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 16 [hereinafter

Bethea Opinion], 2016 WL 6123241; Minutes, id. (Oct. 19, 2016), D.E. 13. 

52. Order, id. (Nov. 1, 2106), D.E. 18; see Voluntary Dismissal, id. (Oct. 24, 2016), D.E. 17. 

53. Order, Ga. Coal. for the People’s Agenda, Inc. v. Deal, No. 4:16-cv-269 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 

15, 2017), D.E. 31; see Stipulated Dismissal, id. (Mar. 10, 2017), D.E. 30. 

54. Interview with Hon. William T. Moore, Jr., Oct. 31, 2016; see Bethea Opinion, supra 

note 51, at 3. 

55. Interview with Hon. William T. Moore, Jr., Oct. 31, 2016.