On September 9, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge J. Andrew Crompton issued an opinion in In Re Nomination Paper of Scroggin, 460 M.D. 2020. The opinion rejects the challenge against Howie Hawkins being on the ballot for President. However, it accepts the challenge to his vice-presidential running mate, Angela Walker.
The basis for the objection had been that the stand-in presidential and vice-presidential candidates had not submitted proper declarations of candidacy. But it turns out the stand-in presidential candidate did submit a declaration of candidacy, although the vice-presidential stand-in did not. The objectors had argued the candidacy statement for the presidential stand-in was flawed, but the judge felt it was sufficient.
The decision also says there is nothing improper about Hawkins being on the ballot for president, even though he will be paired with a blank for vice-president. The decision points out the true candidates are the candidates for presidential elector, and Hawkins has a valid set of candidates for presidential elector, so the ballot with list Hawkins for president and no one for vice-president. Here is the 15-page opinion. Thanks to Larry Otter for the link.
Hawkins will be on the ballot in the seven most populous states: California, Texas, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Ohio. The most populous state in which he is not on the ballot is Georgia. Here is a news story.
Yet another very dubious first ??? —
Prez candidate but NO VP candidate ???
—-
One more reason to ABOLISH the worse and worse EC super timebomb / brain cancer mess.
—
ONE definition of Voter in ALL of USA –
USA Citizen, 18 + yrs olde on election days, be registered 28 days before election days.
—
PR and Appv — pending Condorcet.
TOTSOP
Seems like a rational court decision. A bit ironic, however, that every 2 years here in Pennsylvania, the Green Party petition is a complete disaster. The party that wants government oversight in every aspect of our lives, can’t follow rather simple ballot access rules.
Well finally a court recognition about the true presidential electors. Perhaps there is some hope after all.
I’m pleasantly surprised. The courts have been very unkind to third parties in PA. Hopefully the decision will stand if there are any appeals.
So if Hawkins were to win PA, would his electors pick his VP running mate?
Here’s the Philadelphia Inquirer article:
https://www.inquirer.com/politics/clout/green-party-howie-hawkins-pennsylvania-ballot-challenge-20200910.html
Andy asks, “So if Hawkins were to win PA, would his electors pick his VP running mate?”
If Pennsylvania had a faithless elector law presumably they wouldn’t be able to cast any VP electoral votes.
Pennsylvania has no law telling presidential electors whom they can or can’t vote for.
The California November 1968 ballot had no one for president, and Peggy Terry for vice-president, for the Peace & Freedom Party.
There are many instances when ballots didn’t list either a presidential or a vice-presidential candidate, yet there were electors running. Texas 1944 for the Texas Regulars Party; the New Party in 1968 in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Montana (the electors were in favor of Eugene McCarthy but he wouldn’t allow his name to be on the ballot); the Socialist Workers electors in Arizona in 1972; the Independent American Party in Michigan 1960; one set of Democratic electors ion Mississippi in 1960. If Darcy Richardson is reading this he can probably remember other examples.
Even today, North Dakota ballots don’t list any vice-presidential candidates, and until recently Arizona also didn’t list any vice-presidential candidates. There have also been cases in which states elect Governor and Lieutenant Governor as a team, but one of the names was missing. For example, the Democrats in Illinois in 1986 had no one for Governor and a Lyndon LaRouche supporter for Lieutenant Governor.
How many MORON States NOT following up on SCOTUS op ???