On September 9, the North Carolina Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Libertarian Party of North Carolina v State Board of Elections, the case that challenges many North Carolina election laws that are hostile to minor parties. The hearing seemed to go well for the plaintiffs, the Libertarian Party and the Green Party. Five of the seven justices asked questions. The questions showed that the judges are very familiar with the details of the case.
On Justice asked the attorney for the state whether ballot access is a fundamental right. The attorney for the state replied that voting is a fundamental right. The justice responded, saying that wasn’t his question, and he wanted the attorney for the state to respond to whether ballot access is a fundamental right. The attorney for the state then agreed that it is a fundamental right.
The hearing was an hour long. Approximately 30 people were in the audience. The justices were aware of the history of North Carolina’s ballot access requirements for new and minor parties. They knew that the requirement had been exactly 10,000 signatures between 1929 and 1981. They knew that it had been lowered to 5,000 signatures in 1981, with the proviso that people who signed a minor party petition had their voter registration automatically converted to show them members of the party whose petition they had signed (that law had been struck down in federal court in 1982 in a lawsuit filed by the Socialist Workers Party). The justices knew that the legislature then imposed the current petition requirement, 2% of the last gubernatorial vote, which now equals 85,379 valid signatures.
The state’s biggest argument has always been that having as many as three minor parties on the ballot, which occurred in 1996, caused crowded ballots, because North Carolina elects 10 statewide state offices in presidential years. With that many offices on the ballot, and some races having as many as five candidates on the ballot, some counties had to print the ballot on several cards instead of just one card, and that caused voters to take longer in the voting booth. But the technology in those counties in 1996 no longer is used in North Carolina, and the justices knew that also. A decision will probably be issued in the next four months.
I believe the date of the hearing in the ACLU case on behalf of the Green and Libertarian Parties in Raleigh,NC was today, September 9, not September 9. Or was there a hearing I was not aware of?
Well, see how easy it is to mistype a date! I meant to say “September 9, not September 8”, not “September 9, not September 9”.
Thanks! I fixed it.
More MORON thinking in the courts.
There are constitutional and statutory and common law *rights* (and even *privileges* and *immunities*) — NONE is more *fundamental* than others.
i.e. having the constitutional qualifications to be an Elector = constitutional *right* to vote, etc.
Since when are constitutional *rights* determined by the possible size of a ballot ???
How did ALL States manage to survive with the old bedsheet paper ballots ??? — even for absentee voters to worry about.
Obvious question – what was THE largest ballot in U.S.A. or even world history ???
See the 2010 Iraq ballot — roughly 3 feet x 4 feet (one side) — due to the zillion party groups – getting ballot access.
i.e. more MINDLESS MORONS doing and arguing ballot access cases — with even worse MINDLESS MORON judges asking the WRONG questions and getting the WRONG answers ??? Duh.
Just collect pictures of primary debates. The second time I ran for Congress (1998 — PA 10CD) there were 10 Republicans on the Primary ballot and nobody complained. They even held multiple 12-way candidate debates – 10 republicans, the one democrat and me (Reform Party) before the primary.
Its another shot across the bow to take away our paper ballots. Its also crap. Our state has always found a way to ensure that there is no third party.
But we passed a paper ballot law in 2005, as many states are doing since electronic voting is unreliable and cant be verified. There are more optical scan counties then before.
The ballot would STILL be crowded if it were on an electronic voting machine, and would take even longer on a touchscreen then on a paper ballot.
With paper ballots the lines are shorter and you don’t have to depend on a $5,000 voting machine to mark and record your choice.