Eighth Circuit Strikes Down Ordinance Outlawing Signs that Have Consequence of Disturbing Traffic Flow

Posted on by
2

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.

Libertarians and Greens Submit Supplemental Petition in Maryland

Posted on by
10

August 6 is the Maryland petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties and independent candidates. The Libertarian Party just submitted 5,636 signatures, hoping that at least 2,766 are valid. The Green Party had turned in its first supplemental petition on July 19, containing 3,921 more signatures, but then those had been checked and they were still 138 short. But on August 6, the Greens submitted a third petition, this one with 1,652 more signatures.

The state requires 10,000. The reason supplemental petitions are needed is that even though the parties had already submitted petitions last year, and even though a lower state court had said those petitions were sufficient, earlier this year the highest state court, the Court of Appeals, ruled that signatures are not valid if a voter’s middle initial is listed in the voter registration records and yet the signature on the petition doesn’t include the middle initial on the petition. Also that Court invalidated signatures when a voter signed once without the middle initial, and then signed again, this time with the middle initial (so that both signatures are invalid). Thanks to Bob Johnston and Brian Bittner for this news.

Arizona Superior Court Finds that Top-Two Open Primary Initiative Violates the Single-Subject Rule; an Appeal is Likely

Posted on by
8

On August 6, Arizona Superior Court Judge Mark H. Brain ruled that the initiative for a top-two open primary violates the single-subject rule, and therefore cannot be on the ballot. He found that the portion of the initiative that eliminates elections for party committeemember is not the same subject as imposing a top-two primary for public office. The decision is Save Our Vote v Bennett, cv2012-010717. UPDATE: here is a newspaper story about the decision.

It is extremely likely that the proponents will appeal this decision to the Arizona Supreme Court. The decision does not say, but it is true, that the other top-two primary states continue to let voters choose party officers. This is true in California, Louisiana, and Washington state.

The decision is three pages and says, “The Open Government Committee claims that ‘the only change is that the publicly funded partisan primary through which the parties selected those party officers in the past will no longer provide a venue to select those officers, because it will no longer exist.’ But that’s not what the initiative says. It would be one thing if the initiative provided that candidates for such offices (party offices) will no longer appear on the non-partisan primary ballot – such a provision would directly relate to how the primary election would work. Instead, this provision prohibits state assistance in any form or forum and at any time.” The initiative says, “Political parties may establish such procedures as they see fit to elect party officers, but no such procedures shall be paid for or subsidized using public funds.”

The question is not whether using public funds to elect party officers is good or bad policy, but whether using public funds to elect party officers is the same subject, or a different subject, that changing the method by which public officers are elected.

Gary Johnson Has Enough Valid Signatures in Maine

Posted on by
4

The Maine Secretary of State has determined that the Libertarian Party presidential petition for Gary Johnson has enough valid signature. See this story. This will be the first time a Libertarian presidential candidate has been on in Maine since 2004. In 2008, the Libertarian presidential petition did not have enough valid signatures in Maine.

If Johnson polls at least 5%, the Libertarian Party would then become ballot-qualified in Maine for the next two years. The Libertarian Party has never been a qualified party in Maine, except in the years 1991-1992. If the Libertarian Party gains party status as a result of Johnson’s vote, then it could only keep that status after 2014 if its registration rises considerably. In 2014 it would need to have at least 10,000 registered voters who turned out and cast a vote in November 2014 (it doesn’t matter how they vote, only that they do vote). The deadline has not passed yet, but it is unlikely any other presidential petitions will be turned in. The Green Party is already ballot-qualified. Thanks to Alex Hammer for the link.

Georgia Petition Deadline Passes with No Statewide Petitions and No U.S. House Petitions

Posted on by
4

The Georgia petition deadline for minor party and independent petitions has now passed. No group or individual turned in a petition for any statewide office, and none was turned in for U.S. House either. No statewide minor party or independent petition for statewide office has succeeded in Georgia since 2000. No U.S. House petition, in a regularly-scheduled election, has succeeded in Georgia since 1964. Back in 1964, petitions were not checked, did not need to be notarized, and were not due until October of the election year.

The Libertarian Party is ballot-qualified for statewide office in Georgia, but not for district or county office. The Green Party and Constitution Party have a lawsuit pending against the presidential petition procedure.