IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WILLIAM SCHMITT, JR., et al., :

:

Plaintiffs, : Case No. 2:18-cv-966

:

v. : Judge Edmund Sargus, Jr.

:

OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE : Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Deavers

JON HUSTED, et al., :

:

Defendants. :

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANT 

OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE FRANK LAROSE 

Defendant Secretary of State Frank LaRose moves for reconsideration for the limited 

purpose of clarifying the extent of the Court’s order. Secretary LaRose is required to instruct the 

county boards of election as to the conduct of elections. See, e.g., O.R.C. § 3501.05(B), (C). 

While the Court’s February 11, 2019 Order extends and converts the preliminary injunction in 

this case to a permanent one, the Court’s opinion suggests that the laws challenged in this case 

are unconstitutional in all applications. In order to accurately instruct the boards of elections as 

to the applicability of the Court’s February 11, 2019 Order, Secretary LaRose requests 

reconsideration to clarify whether the permanent injunction applies statewide to enjoin all 

applications of O.R.C. §§ 3501.11(K), 3501.38(M)(1)(a), and 3501.39(A), or only to exclude 

Plaintiffs’ “initiative petitions which are the subject of this case” from appearing on the Portage 

County ballot in a future election. 

On August 28, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a complaint seeking, among other relief, a permanent 

injunction of O.R.C. §§ 3501.11(K), 3501.38(M)(1)(a), and 3501.39(A) as used “to authorize 

local elections boards to act as ‘gatekeepers’ of initiatives[.]” Compl., Doc. 1, at Prayer ¶ D. On 

Case: 2:18-cv-00966-EAS-EPD Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/25/19 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: 295
2 

September 19, 2018, this Court entered a temporary restraining order directing “Ohio Secretary 

of State and the Portage County Board of Elections to place both initiative petitions which are 

the subject of this case on the upcoming ballot for the election to be held on November 6, 2018.” 

Op. and Order, Doc. 22 at 10. Defendants complied with the September 19, 2018 Order. 

Given the limited duration of the temporary restraining order, the parties requested that 

the Court convert the temporary restraining order to a preliminary injunction which would 

remain in effect through election day. On October 4, 2018, the Court agreed and converted 

“[the] temporary restraining order to a preliminary injunction, which expires on November 7, 

2018.” Order, Doc. 28. Briefing and argument continued “on the constitutionality of the Ohio 

laws at issue in this case on or before November 4, 2018.” Id. 

On February 11, 2019, the Court issued an order that “reinstates and converts to 

permanent injunction the preliminary injunctive relief granted in its Opinion and Order issued on 

September 19, 2018.” Op. and Order, Doc. 37 at 10. In its accompanying opinion, the Court 

found a procedural due process violation, holding that Plaintiffs have a liberty interest in the 

ballot-initiative process and that “the State of Ohio has not provided Plaintiffs an adequate 

review process.” Id. at 7-8. The Court also noted that “Plaintiffs intend to submit identical 

initiative petitions in upcoming voting cycles.” Id. at 5. 

Defendant does not seek a reassessment of the Court’s holding. See, e.g., Monroe v. 

Houk, No. 2:07-cv-258, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136117, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 30, 2016) (noting 

reconsideration generally requires manifest error of law, newly discovered evidence, or 

intervening authority). Defendant moves for reconsideration for the limited purpose of clarifying 

the extent of the Court’s February 11, 2019 Order. In order to accurately instruct the boards of 

elections as to the applicability of the Court’s holding, Secretary LaRose requests 

Case: 2:18-cv-00966-EAS-EPD Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/25/19 Page: 2 of 4 PAGEID #: 296
3 

reconsideration of the Court’s February 11, 2019 Order to clarify whether the permanent 

injunction applies to all counties to enjoin all applications of O.R.C. §§ 3501.11(K), 

3501.38(M)(1)(a), and 3501.39(A), or only to exclude Plaintiffs’ “initiative petitions which are 

the subject of this case” from a Portage County ballot in a future election. 

Respectfully submitted,

DAVE YOST

OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL

/s/ Sarah E. Pierce 

SARAH E. PIERCE (0087799)* 

*Lead Counsel 

RENATA Y. STAFF (0086922) 

Assistant Attorneys General 

Constitutional Offices Section 

30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor 

Columbus, Ohio 43215 

Tel: 614-466-2872 | Fax: 614-728-7592 

sarah.pierce@ohioattorneygeneral.gov 

renata.staff@ohioattorneygeneral.gov 

Counsel for Defendant 

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose

Case: 2:18-cv-00966-EAS-EPD Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/25/19 Page: 3 of 4 PAGEID #: 297
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on February 25, 2019, the foregoing was filed electronically. Notice 

of this filing will be sent to all parties for whom counsel has entered an appearance by operation 

of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. 

I further certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served by e-mail or facsimile upon all 

parties for whom counsel has not yet entered an appearance and upon all counsel who have not 

entered their appearance via the electronic system.

/s/ Renata Y. Staff

RENATA Y. STAFF (0086922) 

Assistant Attorney General

Case: 2:18-cv-00966-EAS-EPD Doc #: 39 Filed: 02/25/19 Page: 4 of 4 PAGEID #: 298