The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Libertarian Party of North Dakota v Jaeger, 11-1050, on April 13.
Comments
U.S. Supreme Court Sets Conference Date for North Dakota Libertarian Ballot Access Case — No Comments
What was this about? Does the case have any practical effect on current ballot access efforts.
North Dakota requires a qualified party to have turnout in its primary of up to 15% of all the voters who come out to vote in the primaries of all parties put together, if it wants to have its nominees for the legislature on the November ballot. The law is so restrictive, no minor party legislative candidates have appeared on the November ballot in 1976.
Another flaw in the 8th circuit opinion is that it got the law wrong. It said the primary participation law is needed, because otherwise frivolous candidates would be on the ballot, because once a party gets on in North Dakota, it stays on forever. This is completely factually wrong. A party goes off the ballot if it doesn’t get 5% for Governor, President or Secretary of State, and then it needs another 7,000 signatures all over again for the next election. This error was pointed out to the 8th circuit, but the 8th circuit refused to issue a revised opinion, and it refused to rehear the case.
I hope that U.S.S.C takes the case and strikes down the law. As Richard has said; the new party registration process (7,000 signatures) has to be repeated after every election cycle (barring a minimum threshold). That alone would almost certainly keep the number of parties on the ballot to a user-friendly level.
What was this about? Does the case have any practical effect on current ballot access efforts.
North Dakota requires a qualified party to have turnout in its primary of up to 15% of all the voters who come out to vote in the primaries of all parties put together, if it wants to have its nominees for the legislature on the November ballot. The law is so restrictive, no minor party legislative candidates have appeared on the November ballot in 1976.
Another flaw in the 8th circuit opinion is that it got the law wrong. It said the primary participation law is needed, because otherwise frivolous candidates would be on the ballot, because once a party gets on in North Dakota, it stays on forever. This is completely factually wrong. A party goes off the ballot if it doesn’t get 5% for Governor, President or Secretary of State, and then it needs another 7,000 signatures all over again for the next election. This error was pointed out to the 8th circuit, but the 8th circuit refused to issue a revised opinion, and it refused to rehear the case.
Pingback: U.S. Supreme Court Sets Conference Date for North Dakota Libertarian Ballot Access Case | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
I hope that U.S.S.C takes the case and strikes down the law. As Richard has said; the new party registration process (7,000 signatures) has to be repeated after every election cycle (barring a minimum threshold). That alone would almost certainly keep the number of parties on the ballot to a user-friendly level.