Rocky De La Fuente, who is an independent presidential candidate, has filed lawsuits against several state ballot access laws that require a very large number of signatures.
He sued California on May 11, 2016. That case is De La Fuente v Padilla, c.d., 2:16cv-3242. California requires 178,039 signatures for an independent presidential candidate. The procedure has not been used for any statewide office since 1992, when Ross Perot qualified in California as an independent. According to the U.S. Supreme Court decisions Storer v Brown and Mandel v Bradley, courts should evaluate petition requirements for independent candidates by checking the history of how many times they have been used. No lawsuit has previously been filed by any independent presidential candidate against the California requirement, although lawsuits were filed in the 1970’s by an independent candidate for U.S. Senate, Nancy Jewell Cross.
De La Fuente also sued Florida, on March 29. Florida requires 119,316 signatures for an independent presidential candidate. No one has qualified as an independent candidate for any statewide office in Florida since 1992, when Perot qualified. The Florida Supreme Court ruled in 1974 in Danciu v Glisson that it is unconstitutional for Florida to require more signatures for an independent candidate than for a new party. Florida has been ignoring this decision ever since 1999, when it eliminated all mandatory ballot access petitions for new parties, and non-presidential independent candidates, but retained a very tough requirement for independent presidential candidates.
Here is a filing for the American Delta Party in Nevada.
https://nvsos.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=4285
He has also filed suit in:
Oklahoma (Western District) 5/31 5:16-cv-00583-F
Based on the large number of signatures;
North Carolina (Middle District) 5/16 1:16-cv-00470-TDS-LPA
Based on the large number of signatures and early filing deadline.
Florida (Northern District) 3/16 4:16-cv-00196-RH-CAS
The Florida SOS has issued a response on this one. It brings up that De La Fuente had previously filed suit to gain access to the Democratic Primary ballot, and might not qualify as a candidate seeking to be President as a candidate without party.
Yet he didn’t make it onto the primary ballot, therefore since he would only have been on the November ballot, a sore loser law wouldn’t apply.
While I applaud this effort, couldn’t he very easily get the American Delta Party qualified as a party in Florida?
I read through what you have to do, and in the end it looks like the Elections Division reviews an application and determines if a party can get on the ballot.
I wonder why this guy is doing this. Sure, it’ll be great for future candidates if he wins these lawsuits. But if the Democratic primaries are any indication he’s a really unpopular candidate. He consistently finished last or nearly last multi candidate contests.
If these ballot access cases are won, I wonder if this could wind up into a landmark campaign in the judicial sense, like John Anderson in 1980.
1. Every election is NEW.
2. EQUAL ballot access tests for ALL candidates for the same office in the same area.
Much too difficult for the robot party hack SCOTUS MORONS from judicial Hell or what ???
— with ALL of their JUNK nonsense about *severe* ballot access laws
— i.e. ALL of the vague JUNK adjectives and adverbs that the MORONS put in their JUNK opinions on ALL legal subjects.
I admire De La Fuente for suing Florida. It is ridiculous that Florida should have abolished mandatory petitions for all candidates, excepting only independent presidential candidates. It is especially ridiculous given that in 1974, the Florida Supreme Court said it violates the US and state constitutions to require more signatures for independent candidates than for new parties. Also the US Supreme Court said in 1983 that states must go easier on ballot access for presidential candidates than for candidates for other office. Yet ever since the existing Florida laws were passed in 1999, no one else has challenged Florida on this point.
Rocky appeared on primary ballots in a bunch of states.
“I wonder why this guy is doing this. Sure, it’ll be great for future candidates if he wins these lawsuits. But if the Democratic primaries are any indication he’s a really unpopular candidate. He consistently finished last or nearly last multi candidate contests.”
I think pride and spite are a big part of it. He recently gave several Spanish-language interviews about getting on the ballot as a independent and founding the American Delta Party and he really seems mad as hell about the Democratic Party ignoring his primary campaign. He has a ton of money, so he can afford to “get revenge” (or try) through lawsuits as much as he wants.
http://www.univision.com/noticias/elecciones-2016/la-campana-ignorada-del-tenaz-rocky-de-la-fuente-el-unico-hispano-en-la-carrera-por-la-casa-blanca
This article appears to say that De La Fuente is not eligible in North Carolina and Texas because of sore loser laws. It also suggests that he also intends to run for senator in Florida, establishing residency by traveling from port to port by boat.
Anderson v Babb will protect De La Fuente from the NC sore loser law.
Clay
ck the facts before you comment…….
Look at Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_De_La_Fuente#/media/File:Primaries_third_place.png
He came in 3rd in more than 25 States more than every other candidate combined ……
go to his website Rocky2016.com and his Facebook VoteRocky2016.com and his Twitter @VoteRocky2016