Utah Republican Party Loses in Tenth Circuit Over Methods to Obtain the Republican Nomination

On March 20, the Tenth Circuit handed down a decision in Utah Republican Party v Cox, 16-4091. The issue was the state law that says parties that want to have their labels on the general election ballot, next to the names of their nominees, must allow individuals to petition onto that party’s primary ballot. The Republican Party does not want anyone to be allowed to petition onto its primary ballot. Instead, it wants all individuals who want its nomination to show substantial support at a party convention. The Republican Party doesn’t object to having a primary, but it wants only individuals who showed strength at such a convention to be on the primary ballot.

Judge David Ebel, a Reagan appointee, upheld the state law, just as the U.S. District Court had done. Judge Carlos Lucero, a Clinton appointee, agreed. Judge Timothy Tymkovich, a Bush Jr. appointee, dissented and would have held that freedom of association allows the Republican Party to exclude primary petitioning candidates.

All three judges agreed that the number of signatures needed to get on the Republican primary ballot for legislature is not unconstitutional, even though they are very high: 2,000 for State Senate and 1,000 for State Representative. Although they felt the petitions are perhaps unreasonably difficult, they said that doesn’t matter, because there is another way to get on to the primary ballot (showing strength at a party convention). Also they said that the party isn’t injured by those difficult petitions requirements. They left the door open to the possibility that a petitioning candidate might prevail. Thanks to David Billings for the news about the decision.


Comments

Utah Republican Party Loses in Tenth Circuit Over Methods to Obtain the Republican Nomination — 3 Comments

  1. Even the Utah DARK AGE cults from 1840s-1850s are informed that the USA Const is in force in Utah.

    PUBLIC Electors having PUBLIC nominations for PUBLIC offices via PUBLIC LAWS.

    NO primaries.

    PR and AppV

  2. The court probably thought it was hypocritical for the URP to be challenging the petition requirement since they were opposed to the petition process in the first place.

    It is reasonable to have a higher barrier for primary access in this case, since candidates placed on the primary ballot by convention must have substantial support. If you are going to get on the primary ballot it is reasonable to have the support of a substantial share of the rank and file.

    Of course, as always, it would be better to eliminate partisan nominations altogether.

  3. Parties are a bit normal in legislative bodies —

    most laws are *partisan* – by definition —

    ie more or less control freak statism — for 6,000 plus years –

    esp. tax/borrow — spending laws.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.