Arizona Legislature Files Lawsuit to Reclaim Authority to Draw U.S. House District Boundaries

On June 7, the Arizona legislature filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that the U.S. Constitution’s Article One requires that only state legislatures can draw U.S. House district boundaries. In Arizona, an independent redistricting commission draws the boundaries.

The Arizona legislature has a large Republican majority. A few months ago, Republicans were so displeased with the 2011 U.S. House district boundaries that Republican Governor Jan Brewer and the State Senate removed the chair of the redistricting commission. However, the State Supreme Court then reinstated the Chair.

The case is Arizona State Legislature v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 2:12cv-1211. The Complaint asks for a three-judge court.

Objectivist Party Expects to Place Presidential Ticket on Ballot in Two States

Sometime in 2010, at an event in St. Louis, the Objectivist Party nominated Thomas Stevens for President for the 2012 election. The 2012 vice-presidential nominee is Alden Link. The same pair ran in 2008, and received 755 votes in the entire nation. For the 2012 election, the ticket is already on the ballot in Colorado, and expects to be on in Florida.

New Political Party in New Jersey Fights to Win Permission to Use its Actual Name

A new political party, which exists only in New Jersey so far, has filed petitions to place its nominees for U.S. Senate, U.S. House in two districts, and County Freeholder in two counties on the November 2012 ballot. However, New Jersey election officials have rejected the petitions because the name of the party is the Democratic-Republican Party. It is somewhat likely the group will sue.

The party doesn’t yet have a web page, but is associated with the web page boldtruth.com. That web page presents the case that in the early 1790’s, a constitutional amendment did actually get ratified. That amendment requires a member of the U.S. House for each 50,000 inhabitants.

The party founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison was the Democratic-Republican Party. It was one of the two major parties during the period 1792 through 1820. The state won’t permit the name because the state says the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have exclusive title to those two words.

Democrats are Largest Party in California’s 31st U.S. House District, But Top-Two Open Primary Leaves Party with No Candidate in November

California’s 31st U.S. House district ballot in November 2012 will list two Republicans, Gary G. Miller and Bob Dutton. At the June 5, 2012 primary, Miller placed first with 26.9% of the vote, and Dutton placed second, with 25.1% of the vote.

However, the district has more registered Democrats than registered Republicans. The registration in the district is: Democratic 40.8%, Republican 35.3%, independent 19.3%, other parties 3.6%. The district is centered on San Bernardino County and had no incumbent running this year.

Four Democrats, but only two Republicans, ran in the June 5 primary. It is virtually certain that if fewer Democrats had run, Pete Aguilar, a Democratic candidate and Mayor of Redlands, would have placed among the top two. Aguilar placed third, with 22.5% of the vote. Democrats had been expecting to win this seat in November, but now it is impossible, because no Democrat is on the November ballot.

Miller had been a sitting congressmember in a district in Orange County, but he moved into this district. See this story which explains why. Miller was the beneficiary this year of $709,000 from the National Association of Realtors PAC, and from a super-PAC also funded by the Realtors. The PAC did not contribute directly to Miller’s campaign, but used the money to independently send direct mail and broadcast ads in support of Miller. Miller sits on the House Financial Services Committee, which oversees the real estate industry. See this Whitter Daily News story for more detail. Miller also raised $736,115 in direct contributions, according to the FEC web page.

Supporters of top-two would say that the Democrats in the 31st district are fortunate, because they get to choose between two Republicans. Top-two proponents say the Democrats are free to choose the more “liberal” of the two Republicans. But neither Miller nor Dutton is “more liberal” than the other. Dutton is a sitting State Senator who was the Republican leader in the State Senate, until he resigned his leadership position earlier this year so as to concentrate on his Congressional race. Both Dutton and Miller are standard orthodox Republicans. Thanks to Nicholas Heidorn for the link, and to Rob Richie for drawing attention to this race.

Montana Secretary of State Files Brief in Defense of Her Decision to Set a May 29 Deadline

On June 6, the Montana Secretary of State filed a 7-page brief in U.S. District Court in Kelly v McCulloch, defending her decision, made on May 29, to set a May 29 petition deadline for non-presidential independent candidates.

On Friday, late in the day, May 25, the U.S. District Court had invalidated the statutory March petition deadline. No one was aware of this decision until Tuesday morning, May 29 (May 28 was a holiday). The Secretary of State’s decision, saying, in effect, “OK, the new deadline will be today” obviously gave no potential independent candidate a chance to take advantage of the new deadline. Therefore, the plaintiffs then asked the Court to set an August 15 deadline instead.

The Secretary of State’s brief says that the plaintiffs’ brief cites no legal authority for its argument that what the Secretary of State decided on May 29 is invalid. However, the Secretary of State’s brief doesn’t cite any precedent arguing that what she did is valid. There are no precedents, because never before in history has any state made a decision like this. Early petition deadlines have been struck down, or enjoined, 51 times in the past. Never before did a state election official then set a new deadline that was impossible for anyone to meet. Generally, when a state loses a constitutional ballot access lawsuit, it tries to offer meaningful relief. For example, when the New Jersey April petition deadline was enjoined on July 21, 1997, the state accepted petitions until July 28, 1997.

Montana’s brief is also deceptive. It implies that the new deadline is in June, which is not true; the new deadline is May 29.