Earlier this year, the Ohio legislature passed SB 47, which, among other things, said that independent candidates must complete their petitions within one year. They can start as early as they wish, but they must finish up no later than one year after they start.
On November 18, Richard Duncan, who was an independent candidate for President in Ohio in both 2008 and 2012, filed a lawsuit against that law. Ohio requires 5,000 valid signatures for a statewide independent. Both times he ran, he collected all his own signatures, so he took several years to complete his petitions. He was the only presidential independent candidate who got on the ballot in Ohio in 2012, so one wonders why the Ohio legislature passed this restriction, which almost seems aimed at Duncan. He got 12,557 votes for president in Ohio in 2012, and he was not on the ballot in any other state. The lawsuit is Duncan v Husted, 2:13cv-1157, southern district. The case was assigned to Judge Algenon Marbley.
Any precedents for having an indefinite amount of time to collect signatures?
There really are no exact precedents. Ohio is the first and only state that tells an independent candidate he or she can choose the petitioning period, but that the period is limited to a certain amount of time. By contrast, quite a few states simply tell independent candidates that they can’t start until a certain date, which is a different restriction.
Mr. Brown; thanks for your involvement on these issues.
In Texas, there is no starting date in law for collecting signatures to qualify for party primaries, though most candidates pay the filing fee. In 2012, I was told that a would-be candidate should be sure to file with the Texas Ethics Commission before beginning the petition efforts.
Perhaps an equal protection challenge, since Ohio does not impose a similar restriction on primary candidates (who of course are running for party nominations). Hence, Ohio is discriminating between party candidates and independents.