As previously noted, on June 17, the Hawaii Democratic Party filed a federal lawsuit, arguing that the party is entitled to restrict voting in its primary elections to party members. Hawaii has never had registration by party.

In order to prevail, the party must overturn a section of the Hawaii Constitution. Article II, section 4, says in part, “No person shall be required to declare a party preference or non-partisanship as a condition of voting in any primary or special primary election.” The party argues in its Complaint that the state Constitution and state election code prevents the party “from exerting any control over who may participate in the nomination of its candidates…A potential effect is that the active, earnest, and faithful members of the party may be substantially outnumbered in their own nomination process, by persons unknown to the party.”

The case is Democratic Party of Hawaii v Nago, 1:13cv-301. Here is the Complaint. It was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge J. Michael Seabright, a George W. Bush appointee who, in past election law cases, has ruled for the state. In Nader v Cronin he upheld Hawaii law that requires six times as many signatures for an independent presidential candidate as are required for an entire newly-qualifying party. In Kostick v Nago, he was part of a 3-judge panel that upheld Hawaii redistricting, which excludes in the population counts certain voters (students or military) who seem not to be permanent residents. Judge Seabright is currently handling a case filed by the Justice Party against the February petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties to get on the ballot. Now that California’s deadline has been struck down, Hawaii has the earliest mandatory deadline in the nation for newly-qualifying parties to get on the ballot.