On November 6, the U.S. government voluntarily dismissed its lawsuit that had been filed to separate out approximately 20,000 ballots in California. Here is the letter. U.S.A. v State of California, c.d., 2:26cv-12025.
2
On October 21, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Pitman refused the state’s request to dismiss the ballot access case filed by an independent candidate for Lieutenant Governor. Collier v Howden, w.d., 1:26cv-1574. The state had argued that the case is moot, but that argument did not prevail. The lawsuit challenges the high number of signatures for statewide independents, which will probably be over 100,000 when all the 2026 ballots are counted. The requirement is 1% of the gubernatorial vote. The lawsuit also challenges the short petitioning period for independent candidates who run in races in which there had been a primary run-off for that same office. That period, in those circumstances, is only 30 days.
Texas law concerning independent candidates is wildly irrational. If an independent is running for district or county office, he or she only needs 500 signatures or less. But the statewide petitioning requirement will be over 100,000.
On November 3, election day, some non-profit corporations and the Montana Republican Party filed a federal lawsuit to overturn Montana Initiative 194, which had passed that very day with 65% of the vote. The initiative makes it illegal for corporations to spend money to influence the outcome of any election. Frontier Institute v Knudsen, 6:26cv-73. Here is the Complaint.
The Montana Republican Party is not a corporation, but it is a plaintiff because it says the initiative injures it, because the party in often the beneficiary of independent spending by certain corporations. The initiative makes an exemption for news corporations. The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge William W. Mercer, a Trump appointee.
On November 3, election day, U.S. District Court Judge Karen Schreier, a Clinton appointee, issued a court order protecting the right of voters in Charles Mix County, South Dakota, to wear T-shirts that say, “Natives Vote” while in the polling area. Provost v Gant, 4:26cv-4211. Here is the order.
Approximately twenty voters had been told in 2024 in Charles Mix County that they could not vote unless they removed or concealed similar T-shirts. Fearful that it might happen again, one of those voters filed a federal lawsuit on the day before the election. County election officials promised not to repeat their 2024 behavior, but the judge still granted the TRO, reasoning that the county could change its mind unless restrained.
On November 2, Wisconsin filed this brief in Americans for Citizen Voting PAC v Wolfe, e.d., 2:26cv-786. This is the lawsuit challenging the new Wisconsin law that bans out-of-state circulators, except that it doesn’t cover presidential petitions.