On October 22, the Delaware Supreme Court issued a three-page ruling, saying the lawsuit McVay v Department of Elections is moot. Therefore, the Court won’t decide the issue. The issue is whether a minor party nominee who then files in a major party primary can be kept off the primary ballot. The lower court had refused to order that two Libertarian nominees for public office in 2010 should be permitted to file in major party primaries.
Delaware permits fusion, and there is no election law that says anyone should be kept off a primary ballot, just because they are minor party nominees. But the major parties had objected to the filing. Therefore, as things stand now in Delaware, a minor party may cross-endorse a major party nominee, but the two major parties can always block a minor party nominee from winning a cross-endorsement from a major party, even if the voters in those major party primaries would like to cross-endorse that minor party nominee.
The U.S. Supreme Court already settled in 1969 that ballot access cases are not moot just because the election is over. The Delaware Supreme Court’s decision is erroneous. Perhaps the same issue will be raised in federal court. Delaware is in the 3rd circuit, and the 3rd circuit ruled in 1999 that if Pennsylvania permits the two major parties to engage in fusion, it can’t ban fusion for minor parties. That case, Reform Party of Allegheny County v Allegheny County Dept. of Elections, 174 F.3d 305 (1999) is not exactly the same as the Delaware case, but it is very close.
NO case is moot — unless the alleged law involved in repealed retroactively.
$$$ damages in all cases — to bankrupt the party hack morons involved in the various regimes.
Separate is still not equal in all States all the time.
Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
Doesn’t a political party have a right to determine which candidates may seek its nominations?
I think its more state law then political parties that determine who runs in primaries, in most states. California I thinks says that you have to be registered with a political party for a year to run in the primary, where other states like Montana, you can just file as a political party nominee. In 2008 Bob Kelleher, a noted green and Democrat filed in the Montana Republican primary and won the chance to run against the incumbent Max Baucus. When Republicans spoke about supporting their candidates, there was always someone who said where are the Kelleher signs. The Republicans didn’t support Kelleher, but Kelleher still received over 120-thousand votes.
#3 I thought that Richard Winger might recognize a 1st Amendment right of political (dis)association.
No court has ever ruled that parties have a constitutional right to ban certain candidates from running in its primaries, when state law appears to allow such candidates to run in its primaries. If Delaware wants to give the major parties the ability to bar outside candidates from running in its primaries, then the legislature ought to spell this out. But elections officials should not be allowed to make up rules that don’t exist in the law.
The Alaskan Independence Party wanted to bar one particular person from running in its primary, a few years ago, but the party lost in both US District Court and in the 9th circuit. See Alaskan Independence Party v State, 545 F 3d 1173 (2008).
PUBLIC primaries by PUBLIC Electors are part of the PUBLIC nominating process — TOTALLY subject to State L-A-W-S — and NOT party hack rules and dictates.
See the Texas White Primary cases late 1920s-1930s — the beginning of major SCOTUS action in such PUBLIC primaries.