As ELB readers know, I’m generally skeptical that timing should be the primary thing that courts consider when voting rights are at stake. I think the Purcell Principle has been elevated improperly above the normal four-part consideration of issues related to preliminary injunctive relief.

But we have seem some extremely late attempts this year to try to change ballot access rules, taking candidates on or off the ballot. In this Cornel West situation, there was long delay in seeking this relief, and now we are in a situation where the ballots have already been printed and we are talking about the potential for reprinting or taking other extreme measures to get West on the ballot. The district court was right to say this request comes too late.

The better way to think of these extremely late cases is not to apply Purcell but to apply principles of laches. Laches is an equitable defense that requires proof of unreasonable delay and prejudice. That’s exactly what’s going on in a case like this one.