From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rivera v. Schwab

Supreme Court of Kansas
May 18, 2022
508 P.3d 1289 (Kan. 2022)

Opinion

No. 125,092

05-18-2022

Faith RIVERA et al., Tom Alonzo et al., and Susan Frick et al., Appellees, v. Scott SCHWAB, Kansas Secretary of State, in his Official Capacity, and Michael Abbott, Wyandotte County Election Commissioner, in his Official Capacity, Appellants, and Jamie Shew, Douglas County Clerk, in his Official Capacity, Appellee.

Brant M. Laue, solicitor general, argued the cause, and Kurtis K. Wiard, assistant solicitor general, Shannon Grammel, deputy solicitor general, Dwight R. Carswell, deputy solicitor general, Jeffrey A. Chanay, chief deputy attorney general, Derek Schmidt, attorney general, Anthony F. Rupp, of Foulston Siefkin LLP, of Overland Park, and Gary Ayers and Clayton Kaiser, of the same firm, of Wichita, were with him on the briefs for appellants. Stephen R. McCallister, of Dentons US LLP, of Kansas City, Missouri, argued the cause, and Mark P. Johnson, Betsey L. Lasister, and Curtis E. Woods, pro hac vice, of the same firm, were with him on the briefs for appellees Susan Frick et al. Lalitha D. Madduri, pro hac vice, of Elias Law Group LLP, of Washington, D.C., argued the cause, and Spencer W. Klein, pro hac vice, Joseph N. Posimato, pro hac vice, of the same firm, Abha Khanna, pro hac vice, and Jonathan P. Hawley, pro hac vice, of the same firm, of Seattle, Washington, and Barry R. Grissom and Jake Miller, pro hac vice, of Grissom Miller Law Firm LLC, of Kansas City, Missouri, were with her on the brief for appellees Faith Rivera et al. Sharon Brett, Josh Pierson, and Kayla DeLoach, of American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Kansas, of Overland Park, and Mark P. Gaber, pro hac vice, Richard Samuel Horan, pro hac vice, and Orion de Nevers, pro hac vice, of Campaign Legal Center, of Washington, D.C., Elisabeth S. Theodore, R. Stanton Jones and John A. Freedman, of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, of Washington, D.C., and Rick Rehorn, of Tomasic & Rehorn, of Kansas City, were on the briefs for appellees Tom Alonzo et al. No appearance by Jamie Shew, appellee.


Brant M. Laue, solicitor general, argued the cause, and Kurtis K. Wiard, assistant solicitor general, Shannon Grammel, deputy solicitor general, Dwight R. Carswell, deputy solicitor general, Jeffrey A. Chanay, chief deputy attorney general, Derek Schmidt, attorney general, Anthony F. Rupp, of Foulston Siefkin LLP, of Overland Park, and Gary Ayers and Clayton Kaiser, of the same firm, of Wichita, were with him on the briefs for appellants.

Stephen R. McCallister, of Dentons US LLP, of Kansas City, Missouri, argued the cause, and Mark P. Johnson, Betsey L. Lasister, and Curtis E. Woods, pro hac vice, of the same firm, were with him on the briefs for appellees Susan Frick et al.

Lalitha D. Madduri, pro hac vice, of Elias Law Group LLP, of Washington, D.C., argued the cause, and Spencer W. Klein, pro hac vice, Joseph N. Posimato, pro hac vice, of the same firm, Abha Khanna, pro hac vice, and Jonathan P. Hawley, pro hac vice, of the same firm, of Seattle, Washington, and Barry R. Grissom and Jake Miller, pro hac vice, of Grissom Miller Law Firm LLC, of Kansas City, Missouri, were with her on the brief for appellees Faith Rivera et al.

Sharon Brett, Josh Pierson, and Kayla DeLoach, of American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Kansas, of Overland Park, and Mark P. Gaber, pro hac vice, Richard Samuel Horan, pro hac vice, and Orion de Nevers, pro hac vice, of Campaign Legal Center, of Washington, D.C., Elisabeth S. Theodore, R. Stanton Jones and John A. Freedman, of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, of Washington, D.C., and Rick Rehorn, of Tomasic & Rehorn, of Kansas City, were on the briefs for appellees Tom Alonzo et al.

No appearance by Jamie Shew, appellee.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Stegall, J.:

A majority of the court holds that, on the record before us, plaintiffs have not prevailed on their claims that Substitute for Senate Bill 355 violates the Kansas Constitution. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the permanent injunction ordered by the district court is lifted.

A full opinion describing the facts, rationale, and holdings of the court is forthcoming, along with all dissenting or concurring opinions of members of the court.


Summaries of

Rivera v. Schwab

Supreme Court of Kansas
May 18, 2022
508 P.3d 1289 (Kan. 2022)
Case details for

Rivera v. Schwab

Case Details

Full title:Faith Rivera et al., Tom Alonzo et al., and Susan Frick et al., Appellees…

Court:Supreme Court of Kansas

Date published: May 18, 2022

Citations

508 P.3d 1289 (Kan. 2022)