On November 7, the Ninth Circuit heard oral argument in Merritt v Padilla, 18-55457, the case over an independent candidate’s right to place a title above his own statement of qualifications (in the voter guide, which is sent to every voter in the postal mail) saying he is an independent candidate. Paul Merritt paid to have his statement in the guide when he ran for US Senate in 2016. He started his statement with his own title, saying he is an independent.
Without even telling him, the Secretary of State deleted that title. He then sued, arguing that the First Amendment protected his self-dsecription, and also that it violated due process for the Secretary to have not even consulted with him before doing that. The U.S. District Court ruled in favor of the government. Here is the audio of the hearing, which was before Judge M. Margaret McKeown (a Clinton appointee); Joseph Jerome Farris (a Carter appointee), and a visiting U.S. District Court Judge from Illinois, Virginia Kendall (a Bush Jr. appointee).
Candidate’s name with any ON-THE-BALLOT info in the voter guide ???
ANY disclaimer in the voter guide about ALL other info used by each candidate ???
what did the state want him to say about himself?
The state wants him to say he is a “party preference: none” candidate. That is what is printed on the ballot for all independent candidates (except presidential independents). The state of California does everything in its power to suppress the word “independent.” The voter registration form doesn’t have an “independent” option either. People must say they are no-party-preference voters.
CAPITAL LETTERS USED FOR PARTY HACK GANGS ???
— IN REGISTRATIONS AND ON BALLOTS ???