On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will hear New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres, 06-766. This is the first ballot access case the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear since 1992. It concerns access to the primary ballot. The lower courts had invalidated New York’s petition requirements for major party members who try to get on the primary ballot for Delegate to Party Judicial Conventions. That requirement was a petition of 500 signatures, to be collected from party members in 37 days. Someone who wanted to be a judge, and who was therefore motivated to run a full slate of candidates for Delegate pledged to that person, would need between 4,500 and 12,000 valid signatures, depending on which Judicial District was involved. For Democrats, on the average, this works out to a petition requirement of 1.37% of the eligible signers; for Republicans it is 2.39%.

This is the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has ever taken a case involving the number of signatures needed to get on a primary ballot. Normally states don’t make primary ballot access especially difficult, although it is very difficult in New York, Massachusetts and Maine.

Also on February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down 3 other election law cases: (1) Initiative & Referendum Institute v Herbert, over whether Utah could say that initiatives on the subject of taking wildlife need a two-thirds vote to pass; (2) Carl Romanelli’s pro se case on Pennsylvania’s procedures for checking signatures; (3) Protect Marriage v Orr, over Illinois’ random sample procedures for checking signatures on initiative petitions.