On Wednesday, September 7, the West Virginia Supreme Court will hear Wells v Miller, 16-0779. The issue is whether anyone who holds the constitutional qualifications for an elected office may be an independent candidate, or whether only registered independents can be independent candidates.
There is no law in West Virginia limiting who may be an independent candidate. But all candidates must fill out a declaration of candidacy, and the state uses the same form for members of parties running in a primary, or for independents and the nominees of unqualified parties running in the general election. Because that form happens to ask for “party”, some individuals believe that means when an independent fills out the form, if he is not “independent” by registration, he or she can’t run.
The case arose when Erik Wells petitioned to run as an independent candidate for Kanawha County Clerk. He is a registered Democrat, and even though he had enough valid signatures, he was challenged. A lower state court removed him from the November ballot. If he loses the case, there are about a dozen other independent candidates this year who will also be removed from the November ballot, even though they weren’t challenged. An interesting detail is that Wells is the husband of the West Virginia Secretary of State, Natalie Tennant.
Many members of major parties have run for president as minor party or independent candidates in the past, including Robert La Follette in 1924, William Lemke in 1936, Strom Thurmond in 1948, George Wallace in 1968, and John Anderson in 1980.
Since there are only two candidates listed on the WVSOS website as running as “no affiliation” (http://apps.sos.wv.gov/elections/candidate-search/), the majority of the other so-called independents must be running for local elections. Emails were sent from Wells’ wife’s office last week Wednesday confirming this – and an obvious attempt to influence the court using her office. FYI: http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20160828/gz0116/160829528 – It is a very interesting article since at least one case involves a Republican. The argument against him is that since there was no Republican running for the office sought, the county GOP Executive Committee had an opportunity to put him on the ballot. Ditto for Wells. This is about the RULE OF LAW. If the court rules in favor of Wells, this will just open a huge can of worms here. The primaries will turn into a joke. Well, they should be abolished anyway.