U.S. District Court Judge John A. Gibney of Virginia has set a hearing in Rick Perry’s presidential primary ballot access lawsuit. He will consider Perry’s request for injunctive relief on January 13. In the meantime, he has established a briefing schedule, and also has instructed attorneys for Perry to communicate with all other Republican presidential primary candidates who had filed a declaration of candidacy, to explain to them how they may intervene in the lawsuit. This shows foresight and thoughtfulness on the part of the judge. The case is Perry v Judd, 3:11-cv-856. Judge Gibney is an Obama appointee. The issue is the state’s ban on out-of-state circulators. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news.
Here’s the headline from the movement’s website, http://conservativesforfairelections.com/:
State Law Restricts Virginia GOP primary to just Mitt Romney and Ron Paul
IT WILL TAKE REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS TOGETHER TO GET THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY TO PASS A NEW LAW OR BACK A LAW SUIT.
Yes, I bet both the Republican and the Democrat kingmakers are PUKING CRIMSON over the possibility of a clear referendum between the Republicans’ anointed liberal pansy-boy and the only GENUINE constitutionalist in the race.
God forbid the actual VOTERS in the Republican Party have an un-predestined choice to make a clear expression of choice on which extreme of the “conservative” spectrum should be carrying the party’s banner.
It’s quite simple. The American people should be able to vote for all qualified candidates. Whether your choice is a “front
runner” or a contender. Your vote only counts when YOU can make the choice.
Really? What ever happened to the mantra of the last 20 years that, “we’re not going to invite your candidate X to the debate (controlled completely by the Republican and Democratic parties) because he ‘just can’t win’?” Ooh, now MY “choice” is sacred. Well, screw their newfound sudden sincerity.
I continue to maintain that this “new liberality” comes at a strongly suspicious time — when the two “preferred” parties have lost so much popular support that they are finding themselves tripped up by the very hurdles they themselves strewed out decades ago to hamstring the “little” parties. Now, the candidates with roots in the “little parties” have campaign staff that are heavily experienced in navigating these hurdles with ease, while the big boys are face-planting all over the landscape. Well, sauce for the goose, motherfrackers. Despite my belief that ballot access should be open to all, it would be nothing but justice to make your kingmakers sit on the sidelines for at least one election season while the little voters take back America.
Do the EVIL robot party hacks do ANY thing — except how to destroy Democracy in their EVIL conspiracy plots behind closed doors ???
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
You made my day, Henry. Great post!
Pingback: U.S. District Court in Virginia Expedites Rick Perry’s Ballot Access Lawsuit « WingRight
I think this would be a great time for the Libertarian Party of Virginia to file a “friend of the court” brief stating essentially that the LPVA has been forced to endure these laws since our inception, our cases have rarely succeeded, and therefore the court should give the majors the same answer: “Go fish”.
If the D’s and R’s want to control their own process they should ask for elimination of primaries altogether and go back to conventions.
It is inappropriate in any case for state laws to interfere with how a political party chooses its candidate.
# 5 Sorry – Nominations for PUBLIC candidates for PUBLIC offices by PUBLIC Electors is PUBLIC business – TOTALLY subject to PUBLIC laws.
See the Texas black primary cases circa 1928-1932.
i.e. A. ALL Electors doing nominations – top 2 States
B. SOME Electors (in subgroups) doing nominations – party hack primaries, caucuses, conventions.
The obvious problem is the UNEQUAL stuff in the B. case — due to SCOTUS.
It’s like that Twilight Zone episode where the white bigot wakes up black – only now it’s bigshot duopoly politicians waking up to find themselves on the wrong end of ballot-access law. Not so fun now, is it?
CAN SOMEONE SEND ME A COPY OF THE PLEADINGS IN THIS CASE?
THANKS
LARRYOTTER@HOTMAIL.COM