Texas Supreme Court Unanimously Votes to Keep Libertarian Candidates for Congress and State Office on the Ballot Even if they Didn’t Pay Filing Fee

On Saturday, September 5, the Texas Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in In re Texas House Republican Caucus PAC, 20-0663. The Court has nine members, but two of them are running for re-election (with Libertarian Party opponents) so they recused themselves. The seven justices who participated ruled that the Republican Party effort to keep Libertarian candidates off the ballot for congress and state office was filed too late.

Texas elects its state judges in partisan elections, and all members of the State Supreme Court are Republicans.

The decision’s footnote one suggests that if might be possible for the Green Party candidates for Congress and state office (who have already been removed by a lower state court), to request relief from the Texas Supreme Court.

The decision does not say anything about whether the 2019 law that imposed filing fees on convention parties is or is not constitutional. That issue is pending in a different Texas state court, as well as in U.S. District Court. Thanks to Jared LeBlanc for this news.


Comments

Texas Supreme Court Unanimously Votes to Keep Libertarian Candidates for Congress and State Office on the Ballot Even if they Didn’t Pay Filing Fee — 24 Comments

  1. The final paragraph of the opinion is concerning. It reads to me that the TX Supreme Court is inviting the plaintiffs to institute litigation to have any of these candidates declared ineligible should they win.

  2. Eric, that is a concerning point. That said, it could be read in part as a kick in the butt for the appeals court on the Dikeman case to get in gear. Now, which way the Texas Supremes will rule when they get the inevitable appeal of that?

  3. Great news and report. One correction. The Texas Supreme Court has 9 members and 7 participated in this Per Curiam opinion.

  4. ANNOUNCEMENT
    By James Ogle for US President or Vice President and Elector
    9/6/2020

    Special announcement after Tuesday’s live call to be made here regarding the 9/11 Idaho State deadline for write-in candidates for US President.

    A prominent resident of Idaho State is eligible.

    More info. to be announced Tuesday about Honorable Richard Gage [Information Not Available] and whether he signs as nominee for US President.

    United Coalition USA
    http://Www.pprelectoralcollege.com

  5. Gage might be categorized as ae911truth dot org or Black Panther Party. We are awaiting his answer but his 9/11 anniversary is coming up.

    New WTC-7 Investigation

  6. The two justices who recused are facing two Libertarian candidates that the relators sought to have excluded. All of the individual relators are challenging the nominations of their opponents. That is if they had standing, then CJ Hecht and J Boyd would have had standing had they chosen to join the suit. In addition the Republican Party of Travis County stated that their interests included electing Republican Supreme Court justices. That is, their interest in the case was to elect the justices who were hearing the case.

    One could make the case that all Republican justices should have recused. There was a case in the 1920s involving Woodmen of the World as litigant. All three justices at the time were Woodmen, as were almost all men who had judicial qualifications. The governor eventually appointed an all-women special Supreme Court to hear the case, since the Woodmen forbade female membership.

    7 of the 9 justices participted in the opinion.

    The opinion is based on technical grounds whether a particular section is applicable to convention applicants. It is not unambigious. The form of an application is specified as being the same as a form for ballot candidates with modifcations to indicate that it is not an application for a place on a ballot (this is for all elections, cities, school districts, etc. as well as primary elections). But this only applies to the format of the paper form.

    There are some additional sections below that apply to the processing of an (application), that clearly were intended to apply to elections. But nowhere is there evidence that the legislature intended for them to apply to applications for nomination by convention.

    There are some sections that follow

  7. “Eligibility” in the election code refers to the eligibility to hold a public office.

    There are literally millions of Texans eligible to be US Senator. Texas does not permit ineligible persons serve, be elected, or even seek office.

    Eligibility may change at any time. If an office has a durational residence qualification, a candidate becomes ineligible when he moves out of the district. Tom Delay tried to become ineligible by moving to Virginia. The state party chair declared him ineligible, which permitted the RPT to name a replacement nominee. The TDP sued arguing that Delay was eligible since he might reside in Texas on election day, and therefore it was indeterminate if he were ineligible.

    It is extremely hard, but not impossible to become a non-citizen, and it might be discovered that a candidate was not 25 YO or not a citizen long enough to be a US representative. That is why there is no time limit to declarations of ineligibility.

    But it would appear that the decision of the 3rd COA against the Green candidates was:
    (1) Either contrary to Texas law; or
    (2) An attempt by Texas statute to impose qualification standards on congressional candidates in the guise of manner regulations, which is clearly in violation of the Term Limit Decisions. This would apply to both congressional candidates and the legislative candidate Katija Gruene (Kat Swift), since the Texas Constitution sets exclusive qualifications in the case of legislators.

  8. What State has THE worst ballot access law for 3rd parties and independents for partisan offices ???

    Any added special rot between legis / exec / judic partisan offices ???

    Texas super-rotted by being a *foreign* regime in 1836-1845 and last of the slave States to be liberated in 1865-1866 — June teenth days ???

  9. The worst general election ballot access law for president is Indiana. The worst general election ballot access law for statewide office other than president is Alabama. The worst general election ballot access law for US Hoouse is Georgia. The worst general election ballot access for state legislature, for minor parties, is North Dakota.

  10. @DR You missed the part where the Texas Constitution adds protections over and above the federal constitution largely due to the very abuses that you cited. These additional protections come into direct play in the Libertarians efforts to get the new poll tax declared unconstitutional. Texas has provisions that taxes and fees cannot be applied unequally across different classes of citizens. The new filing fees do exactly that as primary party candidates do not have to pay a tax to be on the general election ballot but other candidates do.

  11. ANY ballot access lawyer able to detect EQUAL in 14-1 AMDT [esp in such 4 States] ???

    How many BAN posters from such 4 ROT States ???

  12. RW — ANY best/least UNEQUAL ROT States in the 4 election types ???

    How many print ballot DEADLINES very shortly ???

    IE getting too late for any more SCOTUS ballot access machinations this year ???

  13. @ Demo Rep:

    Texas was NOT the last state to abolish slavery, as is commonly believed. Slavery was not abolished in Delaware or Kentucky until the 13th amendment was ratified in December of 1865.

  14. Nonpartisan Appv for exec/judic offices — pending Condorcet.
    —–

    French Napoleon III invasion of Mexico — 1861-1867

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_French_intervention_in_Mexico

    USA major pressure on French to get OUT after USA Civil War ended —

    NOT sure how much of USA Army/Navy was in Texas in 1865-1867 or how many USA military supplies were given to Mexican liberation forces.

    Mexico — still a bit UN-stable — monarchs/oligarchs vs REAL Democracy.

  15. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_era

    MAJOR STARVATION OF BLACKS IN 1865-1866 — MORE DEAD.

    TEST IN 100 YEARS ???

    — ESP ABOUT EACH ROTTED SECESS SLAVE STATE IN 1860-1861.

    ROT CONTINUES IN HOW MANY OF SUCH SECESS STATES ???

    AS NOTED BY RW –

    The worst general election ballot access law for statewide office other than president is Alabama. The worst general election ballot access law for US House is Georgia.
    —-
    FAILURE TO DEFINE ELECTOR IN ALL STATES IN 1866 –

    GOT HALF-ASS 14-2 [NOT ENFORCED] WITH LATER *NEGATIVE* ELECTOR ADD-ONS – 15, 19, ETC.

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.