Four Other Republican Presidential Candidates Join Rick Perry’s Virginia Ballot Access Lawsuit

According to this story, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, and Rick Santorum have all joined Rick Perry’s lawsuit against the Virginia ballot access law for presidential primaries. The court’s website does not yet reflect this filing, but that is probably because court employees, like employees of many government offices and non-government offices alike, worked reduced hours on December 30. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.


Four Other Republican Presidential Candidates Join Rick Perry’s Virginia Ballot Access Lawsuit — 12 Comments

  1. Why? Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum didn’t even bother to submit ANY signatures. A bunch of lazy bums, all!

  2. Let’s hope these conservative stalwarts of judicial strict constructionism get an activist judge willing to disregard the Virginia constitution and overturn the people’s duly elected representatives to hear their case!

    Another example of the do as I say, not as I do mentality endemic in American conservatism.

  3. Will the troops on the front lines be getting their ballots while fighting the ANTI-Democracy BARBARIANS in Asia and elsewhere ???

    Deja Vu 1859-1861 all over again ???

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  4. If a few of those people didn’t submit petitions then I think that they would not have standing in this case.

  5. Do even petition forms have to be into constitutions to stop even more EVIL robot party hack machinations ???

    i.e. perhaps even put ENTIRE election law codes into constitutions — to really STOP the EVIL by the EVIL robot party hacks.

    Democracy barely hangs on by a very thin legal thread

    — which is being attacked nonstop by the EVIL robot party hack ANTI-Democracy monarchs / oligarchs

    — think Stalin / Hitler clones

    — or for New Age folks the likes of Iraq Saddam, Libya Kadafi, AQ 911 types, etc.

    Gerrymanders, ballot access, electors-registration, etc. etc.

    The EVIL monsters are playing for PERMANENT EVIL control.

  6. #4, the US Supreme Court has granted standing in ballot access cases three times to parties or candidates who didn’t submit a petition. In 1968 the Ohio Socialist Labor Party sued Ohio over its ballot access law, and didn’t submit a petition, but it still won the case in the US Supreme Court on declaratory relief (the Socialist Labor Party sued Ohio first, and then the American Independent Party filed its own lawsuit, and the US Supreme Court combined them.

    Also in 1972, Communist Party presidential candidate Gus Hall sued California over the independent petition requirements, and he didn’t submit a petition, but he had standing, and he basically won the case. Like the 1968 Ohio example, Gus Hall’s lawsuit was combined with another lawsuit, the Storer case.

    The third case was Eugene McCarthy’s case in 1976 against Texas. He didn’t petition in Texas but the US Supreme Court put him on the ballot.

  7. #6 Richard, you will recall that a lawsuit didn’t work out that way for the Libertarian Party in West Virginia in 2008 when they didn’t submit enough signatures, sued, and continued petitioning for presidential ballot access up to and during the time of the suit. The opinion of the court was that the rules were well known well in advance and that other candidates (Chuck Baldwin) had succeeded in collecting the ~15,000 signatures.

  8. #8, the basis for the 2008 U.S. District Court decision was that 2% was constitutional and that a petition deadline of August 1 was constitutional. The judge didn’t say there was any problem with standing.

  9. So are you saying that the SCOTUS has set a precedent with these cases whereby political candidates do not have to establish standing?

  10. #10, all plaintiffs always must have standing, in all kinds of lawsuits. What I am saying is that it is not necessary that a minor party or independent candidate submit a petition in order to have standing to challenge a restrictive ballot access laws.

    For example, in 1991 the Kentucky Libertarian Party filed a lawsuit against laws that (1) said no one but a member could sign the petition to get a minor party candidate on the ballot; (2) signers had to put their entire social security number on the petition; (3) the deadline was in February of the election year. The party won the lawsuit on all three counts, even though it had not petitioned at all in Kentucky that year.

  11. SCOTUS has been a bit lax regarding standing in many cases.

    NOT any more — since Bush v. Gore 2000 – by the robot party hack lawyers using instant counter-attacks in election cases — NO standing, NO injury, etc.

Leave a Reply

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