Ballot Access News

The Arkansas petition deadline for minor parties that only want to be on the ballot for president has now passed. The independent presidential petition deadline has also passed. The signatures of most petitions that were submitted have not yet been checked. But if all the petitions are valid, there will be nine presidential candidates on the November ballot.

Arkansas has four parties that are qualified for all office: Democratic, Republican, Green, Libertarian. In addition, these groups used the 1,000-signature petition to qualify only for presidential ballot status: Party for Socialism and Liberation, American Third Party, and American Hemp. Americans Elect also has that status, but is not expected to use it for any purpose.

Also, these independent presidential candidates filed petitions: Virgil Goode and Rocky Anderson.

The Virginia State Board of Elections believes it has found one petitioner from northern Virginia who submitted 146 petition sheets that were forged. This petitioner was circulating the petition to place Constitution Party nominee Virgil Goode on the ballot for President. On August 6 the State Board of Elections asked the Virginia Attorney General to investigate.

The Washington Post, in this article, gives the impression that the problem is bigger than it actually is. Goode has submitted 19,000 signatures already, to meet a goal of 10,000 signatures. Already, last month, the Board had verified 8,000 valid signatures, even before checking the signatures submitted since then. The sheets submitted by the petitioner who allegedly forged names were not part of the 8,000 signatures that had already been verified.

Goode has collected many of his signatures personally this year, something he has done in his past congressional campaigns.

On August 6, the Eighth Circuit struck down a St. Louis city ordinance that outlaws conduct, including speech, that has the consequence of impeding vehicular traffic. Stahl v City of St. Louis, 10-3761. The decision is seven pages.

A group put up a sign on an overpass over a freeway. The sign said “911 was an inside job.” The police were called and arrested the sign-holders. The city argued a sign like that would distract drivers and make a traffic accident, or a traffic stall, more likely. The Court said the law is too vague and speech cannot be criminalized when it is impossible for the speakers to know in advance whether their actions are illegal. The decision also notes the original call-in to the police complained about an “offensive” sign, which suggests that if the sign had had a blander message, no enforcement officers would have been called into action. Thanks to HowAppealing for the link.