On December 15, the Texas Republican Party filed a federal lawsuit against the Secretary of State. Republican Party of Texas v Pablos, w.d., 1:17cv-1167. The party is unhappy because Congressman Blake Farenthold is not being permitted to withdraw his name from the Republican 2018 primary ballot. Texas law lets candidates withdraw from a primary by the filing deadline. The deadline was December 12, and Farenthold signed paperwork withdrawing from the race on December 14. The Republican Party received that paperwork on December 15, and told the Secretary of State, but the Secretary of State won’t process the withdrawal because it was late.
The party says the deadline is irrational, because the law doesn’t require the party to forward the list of its candidates until December 19 anyway. But the state responds by pointing out that when an incumbent withdraws by the deadline, then filing is re-opened for another week, and another week from December 15 is December 22. However, the state doesn’t need to mail the ballots to overseas absentee voters until January 20.
The party says it has a freedom of association right not to associate with candidates like Farenthold, especially since Farenthold doesn’t want to run. Farenthold is not a plaintiff in this lawsuit, but news reports say he doesn’t want to run. Here is the Complaint.
Here is a news story, which says that the Texas Republican Party is worried that if Farenthold’s name is not taken off the ballot, then he will win the primary. He represents the 27th district, which includes Corpus Christi.
ONE more time — the EVIL rotted robot party HACKS can NOT dictate ANY thing doing with PUBLIC nominations/elections by PUBLIC Electors for PUBLIC offices via PUBLIC laws.
Some voters nominate (most regimes) or all voters nominate (top 2 regimes).
The SCOTUS M-O-R-O-N-S screwed up the mess in the 2000 Dem case, as usual (going back to 1968 or earlier) — since they are appointed party HACKS.
NO primaries.
PR and AppV.
Also – can a party HACK who wins a primary quit and get replaced by another HACK in Texas ???
The Republicans should claim an equal protection violation. Were Farenthold running for the Green or Libertarian nomination he would have until March 23, 2018 to withdraw; and if he were an independent candidate he could simply fail to file his petition in late June. They should get a TRO against the whole partisan primary system: “it is too plain for argument that permitting or requiring political parties to nominate candidates does not work”. Texas could be required to conduct all 2018 elections for federal, state, and county offices as special elections, as federal courts did in 1996 and 2006 when a court decision disrupted the ordinary nomination system.
It is not clear at all that Pablos is the correct party. Under Texas statutes, the political parties administer their own nomination activities, but in accord with Texas statutes. The state chair of the Republican Party is a state actor in that role.
In olden days (before 2014) candidates for multi-county districts would file with the state chair and then the state chair would send the names of the candidates to the county chairs so that they could prepare the ballot. In a case like the present, the state chair could simply omit Farenthold’s name from the notice, and no one would be the wiser, unless they wanted to go digging through a bunch of filings kept by the party. It also would have been illegal for them to do this.
The purpose of the statute is to prevent someone withdrawing at the last minute, particularly an incumbent. An incumbent could file, discouraging challengers, then a minute before the deadline withdrawing, as his chosen successor files at the last minute, unopposed for nomination. So in these cases, there is an extended filing deadline of five days, to permit other candidates to be aware of the situation and possibility of filing. Ballots have to be prepared and proofed, equipment tested, etc. in order to mail out ballots by January 25. So it is really the regular filing date +5 which allows enough time for ballot preparation. If there are no extended filing deadlines, then the calendar has some slack.
Since 2014, political parties holding primaries post lists of their candidates on the SOS web site. They then tell the county chairs to look on the SOS web site to find out who is running for nomination.
I am not making this up.
The SOS web site has the following disclaimer;
“This information is provided by the Republican and Democratic Parties of Texas. The Office of the Secretary of State does not modify, add, or delete any of this data in any way nor does the Secretary of State own the data. The Office does not vouch for the accuracy or completeness of the candidate filing information provided by the political parties. For questions, please contact the appropriate political party.”
The closest that the SOS actually has anything to do with the lists is that the statute (TEC 172.029(c)) permits the SOS to set a deadline to place the information on the website. The SOS has set a deadline one day before the state chair must notify the county chairs to go look at the SOS website.
It is state law that requires the listing to include the filing date of applications. It is also state law that requires an extended filing deadline in case a candidate withdraws in time, which Farenthold did not. Had there been an extended filing deadline, it is the responsibility of the state chair to notify a newspaper in each county of the 15-county district. Under state law, failure to do so is grounds for removal of the state chair by the state executive committee (I suspect that part of state law is not constitutional), but if there had been an extended deadline, that the state chair could be sued for failure to publicize the extended deadline.
If the state chair declared Farenthold ineligible, his votes in the primary would be discarded. But given the Tom Delay case, there might be no way for a candidate for Congress to become ineligible (renunciation of US citizenship or reverse aging appear to be the only options left).
There is a hearing on the TRO for December 19, 2017.
@DR,
No, except for cause: Death; Catastrophic Illness (notes from two doctors required); ineligibility; or appointed to another office, or becoming a nominee for another office); or no nominees.
Traditionally in Texas, the way to become ineligible is to move out of the district. Since Texas requires a candidate to reside in their district for a particular duration before election, this disqualifies them and permits replacement. This does not work for federal offices, since the US Constitution only requires residence on election day (see Tom Delay). Delay was able to withdraw, but the Republican Party could not replace him even though he had moved to Virginia, and even got a Virginia driver’s license and fishing license). The federal court in Texas said that no one, not even Delay himself could no where he would be residing on election day.
In 2016, an incumbent county commissioner died before the primary. He was unopposed in the primary, and so could be replaced (as if he died after being nominated). His replacement as Democratic nominee was a senator running for re-election. This permitted a new senator nominee to be chosen. His replacement was a state representative running for re-election, so he was replaced also.
If neither primary-nominating candidate has a nominee, then all parties may name a replacement nominee.
Any State rankings of which are the most corrupt regarding replacements before election days — ie special party hack ballot access schemes ???
—-
More const amdt reforms –
Candidates required filings —
incumbents first
NO withdrawal of filings.
—-
Candidate / member replacement lists — NO special elections for legislators.
PR and AppV