Court Explains why Kinston Voters Don’t Have Standing to Challenge Nullification of Initiative Making City Elections Non-Partisan

On December 20, a U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., issued an opinion explaining the basis for its order last week in LaRoque v Holder.  This is the case brought by some voters in Kinston, North Carolina, who supported a winning city ballot measure in 2008 that converted city elections from partisan elections to non-partisan elections.  The U.S. Justice Department had then objected to switching to non-partisan elections.  The voters then sued the Attorney General.  Last week the court ruled against the voters, and for the U.S. Justice Department, but did not issue an explanation.  Now, the court has released its explanation.

The court says the plaintiff voters don’t have standing because they are not truly injured by the Justice Department’s action.  The decision implies that if the city of Kinston had filed the lawsuit, then the lawsuit could have proceeded.  Thanks to Rick Hasen’s ElectionLawBlog for the link.


Comments

Court Explains why Kinston Voters Don’t Have Standing to Challenge Nullification of Initiative Making City Elections Non-Partisan — 2 Comments

  1. More EVIL.

    The Electors-Voters are the sovereign folks in each regime.

    The *governments* and government officials are the employees of such Electors-Voters.

    Way too difficult for MORON courts to understand — superior / inferior.

    Thus – more pressure buildup in the political boiler.

  2. Pingback: US District Court Dismisses LaRoque v Holder | Free the Vote North Carolina

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *