On December 18, Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski completely retired from judicial service. He had been appointed in 1985 by President Ronald Reagan. He wrote only one ballot access case during his career, Peta Lindsay v Debra Bowen, 750 F.3d 1061 (2014). The issue was whether it was lawful for California’s Secretary of State to exclude Peta Lindsay from the Peace & Freedom presidential primary ballot in 2012. Lindsay was age 27 and the U.S. Constitution says no one can serve as president who is under age 35.
During the oral argument, Kozinski asked if the Peace & Freedom Party would be permitted to ask the Secretary of State to place a dog on its presidential primary ballot.
California state courts at that time had already ruled that the Secretary of State must place any qualified party’s presidential nominee on the general election ballot, regardless of questions about their qualifications. Also, California had placed the Prohibition Party’s vice-presidential nominee on the ballot in 1892, and he was under age 35. And, California had permitted Linda Jenness, the 1972 Socialist Workers Party presidential nominee who was also underage, to be a declared write-in presidential candidates. These facts were in the record, but they did not merit mention in Kozinski’s opinion.
Kozinski ruled against voting rights for ex-felons in an Arizona case in 2010, Harvey v Brewer, 605 F.3d 1017. The panel he was on ruled unanimously that Arizona could require ex-felons to pay various fees and restitution amounts before they were permitted to register to vote, notwithstanding the 24th amendment which outlaws poll taxes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-appeals-judge-announces-immediate-retirement-amid-investigation-prompted-by-accusations-of-sexual-misconduct/2017/12/18/6e38ada4-e3fd-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html
One more sex scandal HACK.
Will there be ANY govt — with all the sex scandal quitting hacks ???
—
PR and
NONPARTISAN AppV — for also electing ALL USA judges —
esp SCOTUS and USA Ct Appeals
Did California have the Australian ballot in 1892, and were the names of the presidential candidates printed on the ballot? Was Cranfill’s qualifications questioned at the time.
The 9th Circuit’s decision in ‘Harvey v Brewer’ was written by Justice Sandra Day O’Conner (we don’t know whether Kozinski played much role in the decision, other than voting with the panel). There is no such thing as an ex-felon. Arizona had withheld restoring the franchise to persons who had not paid the the restitution that was a condition of their sentence. That is they had not completed the terms of their conviction of a felony.
Crimes and *punishments*.
Note the P word in the USA 8th Amdt.
Yes, California had government-printed ballots in 1892, and yes, the names of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates were printed on the ballot, above the lists of presidential elector candidates pledged to them.
The Prohibition Party’s nominee for vice-president, James Britton Cranfill, was widely known to be only age 33 when he was nominated. If elected, he would have been 34 on inauguration day. The party was proud of having nominated someone so young.
Since 1892 would have been the first election using the Australian ballot (The reason I was uncertain was that the only article I found about adoption cut off as Governor Markham was considering whether to veto the bill or not) was there a procedure for challenging candidacies? Prior to that elections were essentially write-in. Crandall would have been 35 in September 1893, 6 months into his potential term. US law at the time did not require a Vice President. And of course a presidential primary is a different animal than a general election.
You did not address the question about the extent of Kozinski’s involvement in the Arizona case.