U.S. Supreme Court Puts Libertarian Ohio Case on Conference of January 6, 2017

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, 16-580, at its January 6, 2017 conference. This is the lawsuit in which the Libertarian Party challenges the 2013 Ohio ballot access law. It is not related to the two ballot access cases in the Ohio state court system.


Comments

U.S. Supreme Court Puts Libertarian Ohio Case on Conference of January 6, 2017 — 5 Comments

  1. Hmmm. One more case in which the genius MORON lawyers have FAILED to note that — guess what —

    1. Each election is NEW — i.e. NO automatic ballot access for ANY candidate of ANY party for ANY office.
    2. Separate is NOT equal. Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
    3. EQUAL ballot access tests for ALL candidates for the same office in the same election area

    ??? Stay tuned.

  2. As I have said before, the United States has a 125-year old tradition that political parties should be given automatic ballot access if they did well in the preceding election. The U.S. tradition is alien to almost all other democracies, but because it is so deeply-rooted in the U.S., it doesn’t accomplish anything for a ballot access attorney to make that assertion to any court, much less the U.S. Supreme Court.

  3. What is the magic time period for some MORON SCOTUS stuff to become *deeply-rooted* ???

    How many cases have been over-ruled by SCOTUS as being UN-constitutional ???

    See the Constitution Annotated Table at the end.

    See the mere 98 years of the UN-constitutional Swift v. Tyson 1842 being over-ruled in 1938.

    ALL of the SCOTUS cases since Williams v. Rhodes have been TOTALLY LAWLESS ARBITRARY regarding minor parties and independents — time deadlines, signature amounts, etc. — separately or 2 or more UNEQUAL items – 48 years and counting.

    Hope that SCOTUS holds the LP OH case until the Trump SCOTUS robot party HACK takes office.

    I note that the Electors-Voters do NOT vote at general elections on the question —

    Shall the candidates of any of the below parties be automatically put on the ballots at the next primary election —

    Party A YES NO
    Party B YES NO
    etc.
    Party Z YES NO

  4. If it was magically so deeply rooted to have the Donkeys/Elephants get automatic ballot access, then how did the CA top 2 primary stuff somehow survive in —

    Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442 (2008) ???

    Taking note that the top 2 primary political disease has been spreading to other States.
    ——-
    EQUAL nominating petitions for ALL candidates for the same office in the same election area.
    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  5. “United States has (sic) a 125-year old tradition that political parties should be given automatic ballot access if they did well in the preceding election.”

    The United States have a 125-year old practice of using the implementation of the Australian ballot to keep challengers from contesting, let alone winning elections.

Leave a Reply

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