CYNTHIA BROWN; CARLOS BUFORD; JENNY SUE ROWE v. DAVID YOST, in his official capacity as Ohio Attorney General - Articles

All Content

CYNTHIA BROWN; CARLOS BUFORD; JENNY SUE ROWE v. DAVID YOST, in his official capacity as Ohio Attorney General

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Jun 17, 2024

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC: T. Elliot Gaiser, Katie Rose Talley, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 2: ON RESPONSE: Mark R. Brown, CAPITAL UNIVERSITY, Columbus, Ohio, Oliver Hall, CENTER FOR COMPETITIVE DEMOCRACY, Washington, D.C., Kelsi Brown Corkran, Alexandra Lichtenstein, William Powell, INSTITUTE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL ADVOCACY AND PROTECTION, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.

Judge(s): SUTTON, Chief Judge; MOORE, CLAY, GIBBONS, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, STRANCH, THAPAR, BUSH, LARSEN, NALBANDIAN, READLER, MURPHY, DAVIS, MATHIS, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus

A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service has voted for rehearing en banc of this case. Sixth Circuit Rule 35(b) provides as follows:

A decision to grant rehearing en banc vacates the previous opinion and judgment of the court, stays the mandate, and restores the case on the docket as a pending appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the previous decision and judgment of this court are vacated, the mandate is stayed, and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal. It is further ORDERED that the pending Motion to Compel Defendant-Appellee to Comply with the Court’s Order (Dkt. 35) and Motion to Stay Judgment and Issuance of the Mandate (Dkt. 36) are denied as moot.

Attachments: