Here is the brief of the plaintiffs in Boydston v Padilla, a case in State Superior Court in San Bernardino that says California must print up a presidential primary ballot listing all candidates from all parties, and make that available to independent voters.
Here is the government’s brief, defending the existing law. The existing law lets each party decide for itself whether to let independent voters vote in its presidential primary. For both 2016 and 2020, the Democratic, Libertarian, and American Independent Parties are allowing independents; the Republican, Green, and Peace & Freedom Parties are not.
The case has a hearing November 19, Tuesday. UPDATE: Here is the Reply Brief of the plaintiffs, filed November 12.
ONE more CRISIS case involving the timebomb 12th Amdt.
ASSume NO Fed questions involved ???
In the 2000 presidential preference primary, which was a blanket primary, total votes were reported as OPEN, and DTS and Other voters were listed as IND. The blanket presidential preference primary was not in violation of California Democratic Party v Jones, since political parties were free to ignore votes from other than party registrants.
One of the plaintiff’s claims is that paying for a straw poll that is solely of benefit to the political parties violates the California constitutional provision against public spending for private benefit. Doesn’t this make the political parties that receive this largesse real parties in interest?
Before the 2014 primary election, at which Top 2 was approved, the SOS sent out a notice to the county registrars that voters registered with non-qualified parties were distinct from DTS voters, but nonetheless were permitted to vote in the primaries of parties that permitted. It now seems if the SOS is blurring this distinction.
The affidavit of the pollworker from Alameda County was interesting. When she asked about NPP voters, the other pollworkers ostensibly being trained tried to shush her.