All briefs are now filed in Kurita v State Primary Board of the Tennessee Democratic Party, pending in the 6th circuit. Here is the Democratic Party’s brief and here is Senator Rosalind Kurita’s reply brief. The issue is whether the Democratic Party had the right to set aside the primary results for State Senate in one particular district last year. Senator Kurita, running for re-election, won the Democratic primary by 19 votes, but the party set that aside and declared her opponent was the party’s nominee. If the 6th circuit rules that the party should not have been able to do that, Kurita seeks a new election.
It almost seems that the State of Tennessee and Tennessee Democratic Party are inviting the case to be taken up by the Supreme Court.
Essentially their argument is that Tennessee may require nomination by primary, and if no primary is held, a party may not otherwise make a nomination; but at the same time it is up to the discretion of the party whether to use the results of the primary, and if not nominate someone who did not even file in the primary.
Meanwhile the State is conducting the primary (in conjunction with other elections), ensuring and encouraging qualified voters to participate, certifying the equipment and voting procedures are lawful, counting and certifying the results, and then simply letting a private group disregard the results. A voter should be able to expect that an election is on the up and up, and the State lends it reputation, equipment, and dollars to give that appearance, and it later turns out that it is no better than a carnival game.
I would love it if this case did end up in the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court has made a muddle of the issue of political party rights to control its own nomination process. A US Supreme Court decision in this case would clarify lots of things.
The problem is that the political parties, especially those in power, like to appear to be appendages of the state, and then simultaneously claim to be private organizations. Almost all elected government officials had to first be successful within their political parties, such that they conflate the two, believing party membership is a qualification for public office.
I doubt that were 10 voters who thought someone other than the State of Tennessee was running the primary and that their ballots could be dumped in the trash by some party functionaries.
The only real solution is to remove any vesting of nomination rights in private organizations. This would in no way interfere with the right of individuals to political associate, and would in fact enhance that right since they would no longer be restricted in forming an association for individual offices.
mr. riley –
it would be nice to talk to you briefly. if you don’t mind, please click my name and contact me through there. i would appreciate it.