The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Nader v Cronin, 10-728, at its February 18 conference. The issue is whether there is any state interest in requiring an independent presidential candidate to obtain six times as many signatures as are needed for an entire new party with its own primary.
I was a Travel Industry Management major at the University of Hawai’i. In U.S. v. Ching Tai Sai and
U.S. Ching Tai Sun, Judge Estee gave a ruling that would
retain the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom with that of the
Republic of Hawaii.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Separate is NOT equal — even in sunny HI.
Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
What century will Nader get some ballot access lawyers with ANY brains ???
If I ever find out Demo Rep is getting paid royalties every time Brown v. Board is cited, my faith in humanity will be destroyed.
# 4 Sorry – NO royalties for bringing up BBE.
Your faith may be restored if and when ANY ballot access lawyer gets some brain cells and the SCOTUS folks over-rule ALL ballot access cases since 1968 – except the 2008 WA top 2 case.
Does Nader have faith in BBE ???
P.R. and App.V.
Hawaii should simply move the presidential nomination to the primary ballot. In Hawaii, independent candidates qualify for the general election as if the “independents” were a separate political party.
It would then be a simple step to move to Top 2.