See this fascinating brief, filed February 25 in the U.S. Supreme Court in Doe v Reed, 09-559. This is the case over whether states should make public the names and addresses of people who sign petitions.
Even if you normally don’t read briefs, consider reading this one. It is 70 pages. If you prefer to print briefs in order to read them (instead of reading them on a computer screen), and if you only want to read the text itself, you can skip printing the first 13 pages, which are various non-text Tables of Authorities.
The case will be argued in the U.S. Supreme Court on April 28.
Well, in light of the silly ruling on campaign finance the court will likely rush to defend the poor defenseless conservatives from the big bad homosexuals (cheeky)
I note with great interest this statement on page 35, “if groups can keep measures off the ballot, the result is the same as winning the vote.” Substitute the word ‘candidates’ for ‘measures’. Candidates can nominate themselves to appear on the ballot. Referenda cannot. Petitions for candidates can be dispensed with entirely.
Of course, if the group of people who refuse to sign a referendum petition is large enough then it will not appear on the ballot. Dispute over how large a group is justifiable to veto an election on referenda is probably insoluble. Such is not the case with candidates. No group of any size should be allowed to ban a candidate from the ballot.