On March 10, the Peace & Freedom Party of California, the Libertarian Party of California, and the Green Party of Alameda County asked the California Supreme Court to hear their ballot access appeal. The case is Rubin v Padilla, S224970. The suit argues that the top-two system, in practice, unconstitutionally prevents minor party voters from voting for their preferred candidates in the general election.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
ALL stuff for getting the names of PUBLIC candidates for PUBLIC offices on PUBLIC ballots is PUBLIC stuff.
i.e. ALL voters nominate.
SOME voters nominate.
— according to PUBLIC L-A-W-S.
—
NO now very dangerous primaries — producing only extremist hacks.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
It sounds like taxation without representation to me.
‘Lubin v Panish’ was regarding access to the primary ballot.
Does Nebraska’s method of electing its legislature put an unconstitutional burden on voters? Remember, Nebraska has a May primary?
Is there anything in the California Constitution requiring a June primary? No. So what the plaintiffs are arguing is that the California Constitution violates California statutes.
Louisiana does not elect its federal legislators at a general election.
I disagree with Jim’s comment above. Lubin v Panish concerned access to the election itself, the event at which someone could be elected.
Louisiana does elect its members of Congress at a general election. Louisiana does that in November, which, by federal law is the general election.
See the lawsuit’s extraction from ‘Lubin v Panish’
Now imagine that Lubin’s son is running for county supervisor and his daughter is running for assembly. They both are on the 2016 primary ballot.
Both receive a small percentage of the vote, but no other candidate receives a majority. Two candidates appear on the November ballot for both offices, but no Panish’s.
A voter might say, “I’d expect a candidate who reflected my views to be on the ballot.” It is bizarre to claim that someone had the right to such an expectation with respect to the assembly election (a quite minor office), but not the supervisor election (a quite important office).
Congress is not competent to declare a general election.
What language in the USA Const says that X percent of the Electors-Voters in any part of the USA [FACTION X]have a constitutional RIGHT to have FACTION X candidates on ANY ballots – primary, general or whatever ballots ???
Part of problem – the CA Donkey SCOTUS JUNK case in 2000.
Too many MORON SCOTUS folks to count – being ALL robot party hack appointees since 1789.
—–
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V
ONE election day.
Ballot access ONLY via EQUAL nominating petitions.