On February 28, Paul Merritt, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate in California in the June 2016 primary, filed a request for reconsideration in Merritt v Padilla, U.S. District Court, central district, 8:16cv-606. California has a Voters Guide, which is postally mailed to all registered voters in advance of a federal or state election. The law permits candidates who are willing to pay to have a statement in the Guide, and does not restrict the content, except to require that candidates not discuss their opponents.

Merritt’s statement, which he paid for, said he is a registered independent. The Secretary of State deleted that information from the heading of his statement. A U.S. District Court ruled earlier this year that because it is legal in California to prevent independent candidates from having the ballot label “independent”, therefore it is also legal for the state to prevent this label from being in the heading of a candidate’s statement in the Guide.

The motion for reconsideration points out that when the 9th circuit upheld the ban on “independent” on the ballot, it said the ban doesn’t do much harm because a candidate has an “alternative way” to express his or her views in the Guide. Therefore, it is obvious the ballot and the Guide have different levels of government control. The Guide has less room for government control than the ballot.