On December 20, the Texas Democratic Party filed a federal lawsuit, arguing that the Secretary of State’s willingness to let the Republican Party drop Congressman Blake Farenthold from the primary ballot is unlawful. Texas Democratic Party v Republican Party of Texas and Secretary of State Pablos, w.d., 1:17cv-1186. Here is the Complaint. Thanks to Linda Curtis for the link.
Did the Texas regime copy the election law of any USA State in 1836-1845 (when an independent nation-state) or after 1845 (as a State in the USA) ???
— or perhaps a total revision after the horrific Civil War I in 1861-1865 ???
— IE when did it become *safe* for an Elephant candidate in Texas to exist ??? [not totally guarded 24/7 by the Union Army in 1865-1877).
—
The Congress/SCOTUS morons have permitted USA Complaints to now contain the history of the universe — when ALL the legal *conclusions* about legal points should be in separate briefs.
See the now very dubious USA Rules of Civil Procedure.
This is inaccurate. The Secretary of State is not responsible for the Republican primary. BTW, if the Democrats are going to sue someone, they should have the courtesy of spelling his name correctly, and not use the name of a prior office-holder. They also messed up in paragraphs 24 and 25.
The political parties are state actors in the conduct of their nominating activities (e.g. in 2008, the Texas Democratic Party was found by a federal court to be in violation of the Voting Rights Act).
Since Libertarian candidates can withdraw, and the filing deadline extended until late March or April, the current scheme clearly violates equal protection.
The Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, other parties and independents should join together in overturning the system of segregated partisan nominating activities. For 2018, special elections can be held. For future elections, the legislature can provide for Top 2 elections.
It is too plain for argument that the current system of twisty little passages all different inherently violates equal protection.
@DR, the Republicans did not regularly have primaries until the 1960s. The optional range for qualification was set up to permit the Republicans to choose to nominate by primary or convention.
See also the 2 SCOTUS Texas Donkey White Primary cases – circa 1928-1932 —
setting the stage for many later SCOTUS election law cases.
@DR Smith v Allwright 1944, Terry v Adams 1953
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_primaries
esp the party gangs being State Actors [defendants].
Lots of BAD olde days stuff — continuing on and on in packed Donkey/black gerrymander districts.
The Democrats were denied a TRO, and then dropped the lawsuit, without prejudice, which likely means they will seek to sue again at an opportune time. The Republicans have updated their submission to show that Farenthold withdrew from the primary.
@DR, Bush v Martin 1964, Bush v Vera 1996 (at the district court this was Vera v Richards, after the notorious Ann Richards).
Which rotted State has had the most losing election LAW cases since 4 July 1776 ???
Only the BAN super database knows for sure ???
Any State HACKS in any govt branch been put into a Fed/State jail as a result — even for part of a day ???
Same for Fed HACKS ???