Page:Wood v. Raffensperger (20-14418) (2020) Decision.pdf/20

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.

that he will again seek to delay certification. Wood does not suggest that this situation might recur. Cf. FEC v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc., 551 U.S. 449, 463–64 (2007). And we have no reason to think it would: he is a private citizen, so the possibility of a recurrence is purely theoretical. Cf. Hall v. Sec’y, Ala., 902 F.3d 1294, 1305 (11th Cir. 2018).

IV. CONCLUSION

We affirm the denial of Wood’s motion for emergency relief.

20