Amicus Brief Urges US Supreme Court to Hear Indiana Voting Rights Case

A Jenner & Block team filed an amicus brief asking the US Supreme Court to grant certiorari in Tully v. Okeson, a case over the State of Indiana’s vote-by-mail rules. Indiana permits all voters 65 years or older to vote absentee by mail on account of their age, while requiring voters age 18 to 64 to give some other excuse to do so. In March 2020, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, Indiana announced that it would make mail-in voting available to all voters without excuse, but only for the state’s June 2020 primary. Indiana refused to make similar accommodations for the general election in November.

In April 2020, several Indiana voters and an organizational plaintiff filed suit, challenging Indiana’s vote-by-mail rules under the Twenty-Sixth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and a parallel state constitutional provision. The district court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in late August, and on October 6, the Seventh Circuit denied the plaintiffs’ appeal, and the plaintiffs petitioned the US Supreme Court.

The amicus brief is on behalf of professors of law and history who have written and published on the meaning of the Twenty-Sixth Amendment. According to the brief, the Court has never interpreted the Twenty-Sixth Amendment and, without its guidance, lower courts have interpreted the amendment in divergent and often incorrect ways. “Read in light of its text and history, however, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment provides robust protection to all adults against even subtle forms of age discrimination in voting,”the brief argues.

The team authoring the brief includes Partner Jessica Ring Amunson, Associates Noah B. Bokat-Lindell and Laurel A. Raymond, and Senior Paralegal Cheryl Olson.

Related Locations

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Amicus Brief Urges US Supreme Court to Hear Indiana Voting Rights Case

A Jenner & Block team filed an amicus brief asking the US Supreme Court to grant certiorari in Tully v. Okeson, a case over the State of Indiana’s vote-by-mail rules. Indiana permits all voters 65 years or older to vote absentee by mail on account of their age, while requiring voters age 18 to 64 to give some other excuse to do so. In March 2020, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, Indiana announced that it would make mail-in voting available to all voters without excuse, but only for the state’s June 2020 primary. Indiana refused to make similar accommodations for the general election in November.

In April 2020, several Indiana voters and an organizational plaintiff filed suit, challenging Indiana’s vote-by-mail rules under the Twenty-Sixth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and a parallel state constitutional provision. The district court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in late August, and on October 6, the Seventh Circuit denied the plaintiffs’ appeal, and the plaintiffs petitioned the US Supreme Court.

The amicus brief is on behalf of professors of law and history who have written and published on the meaning of the Twenty-Sixth Amendment. According to the brief, the Court has never interpreted the Twenty-Sixth Amendment and, without its guidance, lower courts have interpreted the amendment in divergent and often incorrect ways. “Read in light of its text and history, however, the Twenty-Sixth Amendment provides robust protection to all adults against even subtle forms of age discrimination in voting,”the brief argues.

The team authoring the brief includes Partner Jessica Ring Amunson, Associates Noah B. Bokat-Lindell and Laurel A. Raymond, and Senior Paralegal Cheryl Olson.

Related Locations

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

News and Insights

Podcasts

Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Discusses Fintech Enforcement, Debanking, and Regulatory Risk on Fintech Layer Cake Podcast

Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon was featured on the Fintech Layer Cake podcast, where she discussed how fintech enforcement and prosecution actually work in practice, and what exposes fintechs and banks to regulatory risk.

July 15, 2026

Publications

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Private Rights of Action Under the Investment Company Act, Private Equity Law Report

Partners Charles Riely, Todd C. Toral, and Martin Glass authored a guest article for Private Equity Law Report examining the US Supreme Court's June 11, 2026, ruling on the scope of private rights of action under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

July 14, 2026

Publications

Emily Loeb Discusses Congressional Oversight Preparedness in Bloomberg Law

Partner Emily Loeb, co-chair of Jenner & Block's Congressional Investigations Practice, spoke with Bloomberg Law article about how companies can prepare for potential oversight exposure ahead of this fall's midterm elections.

July 7, 2026

Publications

In New York Law Journal, The True Lender Doctrine and the OppFi Decision

Partners Jeremy Creelan, Michael Ross, Megan Poetzel, and Laurel Loomis Rimon, and Associate Molly Oberstein-Allen authored an article for the New York Law Journal examining the "True Lender" doctrine in light of a May 2026 California decision that provides the most detailed judicial framework to date for evaluating bank-nonbank lending partnerships.

July 1, 2026

Event

Partner Michael Vernick to Speak at NACUA's 2026 Annual Conference

On July 1, Partner Michael Vernick will speak on a panel at the National Association of College and University Attorneys (NACUA) 2026 Annual Conference in Nashville.

July 1, 2026