On June 16, the Eighth Circuit heard Libertarian Party of Minnesota v Simon, 20-2244. The issue is the mandatory language on non-presidential independent petitions, that says the signer “does not intend” to vote in the upcoming primary for the office that the petition relates to. The U.S. District Court had upheld the law, ruling that just because a signer does not intend to vote in the upcoming primary on the day that the petition is signed, the voter is free to change his or her mind in the future.
Both the judges, and the attorney for the Libertarian Party, seemed to believe that the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled in American Party of Texas v White that it is constitutional for a state to let petitions circulate before the primary but to bar the signer from voting in the primary. Actually, that is not what the Texas law did, then or now. In Texas the primary is held first, and only after the primary is over does the petition circulate. So anyone who did not vote in the Texas primary is free to sign a minor party or independent candidate petition.
Here is a link to the 34-minute oral argument. The judges are Raymond Gruender, Morris Arnold, and David Stras. Judge Stras seemed to feel that the language on the Minnesota petition is very difficult to understand.
Statute and case law has become so voluminous that it’s virtually impossible even for appellate judges to know the full body of the law. Perhaps the entire appellate court system should be restructured so that the geographical circuits are replaced with separate appellate courts that specialize in certain areas of the law. Doing this would also eliminate separate circuits making contradictory rulings on the same subject.
WZ —
The ROT starts at the head – S-C-O-T-U-S
with its vague rulings filled with vague adjectives and adverbs.
Added ROT –
Failure of minority rule gerrymander Congress to have ONLY FULL DC Ct Apps to have orig juris of civil election law cases — ONE appeal to SCOTUS in such election law cases.