On November 19, the Eleventh Circuit agreed to expedite the Georgia ballot access case. The Libertarian Party has already filed its main brief. The state’s brief is due December 13, 2019, and the party’s reply brief is due on December 27. The court hasn’t decided yet whether to hold oral argument. The Libertarian Party says no oral argument is needed.
The case, Cowen v Raffensperger, 19-14065, challenges the petition requirement for U.S. House, 5% of the number of registered voters. The law was passed in 1943 and no minor party has ever used it. No independent has used it since 1964. The evidence shows that at least twenty candidates have tried.
ONE more chance for some genius lawyer [or even a judge] to detect EQUAL in 14-1 Amdt ???
a 1,000 signatures is all that should be required.
Translation from DR-speak:
When you have different paths to the ballot:
(1) Party nomination by primary;
(2) Party nomination by caucus or convention;
(3) New party qualification and nomination;
(4) Independent candidate qualification by petition;
there is NO WAY that ballot access can be made to comply with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
This is analogous to the case of public education in ‘Brown v Board of Education’. There is no way to provide equal educational opportunities in a dual system, even if you purport to spend the same number of $$$$ per pupil.
The only solution is to qualify all candidates the same way, without respect to their party affiliation.
This works in nonpartisan elections throughout the US, and partisan elections in Washington, California, and Louisiana.
JR
Nice to see you have finally detected what I have been writing for about 20 years.
Separate is NOT equal.
Each election is NEW.
INDIVIDUAL candidates are nominated – with or without party labels.
EQUAL ballot access test(s).
—
also-
NO primaries.
ONE election Day.
ONLY Nom pets.
PR and AppV and TOTSOP.
i disagree that the situation is without an equal protection solution.
@EB,
What is your method that would not violate equal protection?
Minnesota has pretty good ballot access rules, except for one or two problems.
Minnesota’s party petition, 5% of the last vote cast, was passed in 1913 and is so difficult it has never been used statewide.
The Minnesota vote test, 5% for any statewide race, is much more difficult than the median state. The median state has a 2% vote test. A few states don’t have vote tests at all, but most do.
Minnesota is one of only six states in which the Libertarian Party has never been ballot-qualified.
ANY LP MN LAWYERS WHO CAN DETECT EQUAL IN 14-1 AMDT ???
1. Minnesota has a much easier Independent petitioning process that third party candidates regularly use. its problem is a limited two week window to circulate it.
2. I have seen the LP on the ballot in MN races. Two third minor parties became major parties in the last election. Automatic ballot access for major parties.
Richard
Yes, the 5% vote test is too high. although its for just about any statwide candidate. two minor parties recently got it.
richard; part 3
Most third parties in Minnesota just use the Independent process, which lets you use a minor party label.
Forming a new major party is too tough, but third parties work around it.
I tried to get a libertarian on the ballot in my Congressional district. i wanted to see how the process really worked. A rural conservative district.
The limited time (two weeks in the summer) frame killed it. People were on summer holiday and didnt want to be bothered or were not local voters.
Although the fact that the libertarian candidate was pro-choice didnt help.
@EB,
In Minnesota, all are equal, some are more equal than others?
$300 to run for Congress for a D or R, even though legally there are no D or R in Minnesota.
1000 signatures for everyone else.
Solution: $300 for everyone. All appear on primary ballot, Top 2 advance to general election.