On June 22, the Utah Supreme Court unanimously ruled that electronic signatures on petitions are valid. The decision is Anderson v Bell, 20100237. It is 15 pages.
As a result, the plaintiff, Farley Anderson, will now appear on the Utah ballot in November as an independent candidate for Governor. Anderson had argued in the alternative that if electronic signatures are not valid, that the March petition deadline for independent candidates (for office other than President) is unconstitutionally early. That argument, if successful, would have permitted him to go get more old-fashioned signatures. But the Court didn’t decide that issue; there was no need, given the outcome on the validity of his original petition.
The electronic signatures were gathered on Anderson’s campaign web page.
If we could get the State legislatures to accept “electronic signatures,” even with the current percentages, numbers, etc., and other unfair and burdensome requirements of some states, ballot position could be obtained for many more parties and independent candidates.
Why are we not advocting more bills with electronic signature procedures in them?
Just doesn’t make sense.
One more step on the road to REAL Democracy — BUT with the party hack incumbents likely to try and stop ALL petitions that even remotely challenge their power.
The U.S.A./State gerrymander regimes are full of arrogant EVIL oligarchs in ONE party *safe seat* gerrymander districts — especially since 1964.
I see this as a huge opportunity. The Utah Supreme Court relied heavily on the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) which has been enacted in every state. This Act replaces all written signature requirements so as to allow e-signatures. It expressly exempts wills, but says nothing about ballot access. It also presumes government will abide in its dealings with citizens–for example, registering cars, paying taxes. It also excuses notarization and verification requirements. Thus, it could be applied even in states (like Ohio) that require circulators to “witness” signatures.
It is certainly an interesting case that illustrates how advances in technology and the mainstreaming of said technology can actually help citizens participate in the political process.