On August 15, a lower Pennsylvania state court removed two independent candidates from the Harrisburg ballot, for city elections on November 5, 2013. See this story. The two candidates didn’t fill out the “substitution committee” blank on their petitions. A “substitution committee” has the authority to replace the candidates listed on the petition, if those candidates die or withdraw. It doesn’t make sense to have a mandatory “substitution committee” for independent candidates. That part of the petition is more to assist minor parties, who could be expected to want to replace any nominee who couldn’t run, but the same logic doesn’t apply to independent candidates. Thanks to Curtis Boyd for the link.

On August 9, two Ohio advocacy groups asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn an Ohio law that makes it a crime for anyone to knowingly or recklessly make a “false” statement about a candidate or a ballot measure. Here is the cert petition. The case is Susan B. Anthony List and Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes v Driehaus, 13-193.

The lower courts had refused to make a decision about the constitutionality of the law. Ever since the law has existed, there have been many lawsuits in both federal and state courts to overturn this law, but the courts invariably find procedural reasons to abstain from deciding whether the law violates the First Amendment.

The Richmond, Virginia Times-Dispatch has this op-ed, criticizing the League of Women Voters and other organizations that are sponsoring debates. All such organizations, so far, have refused to invite the Libertarian nominee, even though in some neutral polls he has been as high as 7%.