Timing is Everything

The Purcell principle establishes that federal courts should generally refrain from interfering with state electoral processes or laws—typically through injunctions—close to an election. The principle arises from Purcell v. Gonzalez 1 where the plaintiffs sued to enjoin an Arizona voter ID law in May 2006. The district court denied the injunction, but a Ninth Circuit motions panel entered an injunction pending appeal in October—one month before the election. The Supreme Court vacated the injunction. It cautioned that, when “[f]aced with an application to enjoin operation of [election] procedures just weeks before an election, the Court of Appeals was required to weigh, in addition to the harms attendant upon issuance or nonissuance of an injunction, considerations specific to election cases and its own institutional procedures.” The court was concerned that last-minute changes could confuse voters or dissuade them from voting. It reasoned that “[c]ourt orders affecting elections, especially conflicting orders, can themselves result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls. As an election draws closer, that risk will increase.”

Click here to read the full article.