On May 12, the New York Supreme Court, Niagara County, invalidated the hostile ballot access changes made by the Public Campaign Finance Commission late last year. Hurley v Public Campaign Finance & Election Commission, E169547/2019. The order says, “The line between administrative rule-making (which can be delegated) and legislative action (which cannot be delegated) has clearly been transgessed. Here is the eleven-page order.
Last year, the legislature gave the Commission the authority to re-write the definition of a qualified political party. The Commission then raised the vote test for party recognition from 50,000 votes for Governor, to the greater of 130,000 votes for president and governor, or 2% of the total vote cast for that office. The commission also raised the number of signatures for a statewide independent, and the nominee of an unqualified party, from 15,000 signatures, to 45,000 signatures, even though the commission was never even asked to consider the petition requirement.
The lawsuit was filed by the Working Families Party. An identical case, filed by the Conservative Party and called Jastrzemski v Commission, was merged into the Working Families Case. Thanks to Bill Redpath and Jim Riley for this news.
That was a terrible ballot access law, so I am glad to see it got thrown out.
SHOCKING — SEPARATION OF POWERS MEANS SOMETHING IN NY TYRANT STATE.
—-
MUST SUE FOR DAMAGES TO BANKRUPT ALL THE HACKS INVOLVED.
ANY USA CIVIL RIGHTS CASES ???–
TO PUT ALL THE HACKS IN A USA JAIL — STARTING WITH THE TYRANT GUV.
WILL THE TYRANTS APPEAL ??? STAY TUNED.
The court ruled that the Public Campaign Finance Commission could not be sued. It also ruled that Republican members of the commission, the state board of elections, and the legislative leaders did not have standing to file a cross-complaint (though the court did essentially agree with their position).
The court never reached the issue of whether or not the change in the ballot access law was unconstitutional.
I suspect the legislature will simply pass the public-funding portions of the law. They might have a go at the threshold, but might not have enough support.
@DR,
Who would the plaintiffs be, and who would the defendants be?
Please try to be specific.
MERE 50 PLUS YEARS USING 42 USC 1983 IN CIVIL ELECTION LAW CASES.
—
CRIMINAL – RARELY USED BY FED OLIGARCHS AGAINST STATE OLIGARCHS.
IT SHOWS – LAWLESS STATE OLIGARCHS AS IN THE NY COMM MESS.
18 USC 241
18 USC 242
@DR,
Who would be the plaintiffs, and who would be the defendants?
See any first year law student at a Texas Law Skoooool.
Clue – most were named in the NY case. See the order caption.
@DR,
Which of these would you sue, and on what basis?
(1) The Public Campaign Financing and Election Commission;
(2) The individual commissioners;
(3) The State Board of Elections;
(4) The individual board members;
(5) The governor;
(6) The Assembly, the Speaker, and Minority Leader;
(7) The Senate, the Majority and Minority leaders.
DR can hire a NY genius lawyer and go thru the list of NY hacks.
Sorry – my time is better spent getting action in the 18 States with voter pets for State Democracy pets.
— to END the rule of the many EVIL monarchs/oligarchs in the USA for starters.
—-
ALL 50 States—
Minority rule gerrymanders
Partisan exec/judic HACKS
SOP violations
distraction typo-
JR can hire a NY genius lawyer and go thru the list of NY hacks.
Geez Demo Rep… why be combative to Jim Riley? I totally disagree with him on Top Two but otherwise he is very plugged in to most state election laws. I believe he is only trying to help you focus on who you would sue and why. I also would like to know how you would proceed. It sounds interesting but hiding behind “any first year law school” mantra isn’t good enough!
JR and CO can go to NY and file their own cases.
Report back to BAN.
NOOO shortage of info about 42 USC 1983 — from 1871 USA Civil Rights Act – derived from 1866 USA civil Rights Act. [ see also 28 USC 1343 ]
Plus 1980 amdt to 28 USC 1331 — de facto repealing many other USA Dist Ct jurisdictional sections.
Too many USELESS MORON law skoool profs to count —
totally clueless about the USA Const and USA laws.
Some of the Profs/their infected moron students get appointed as HACK USA judges – esp on SCOTUS.
Generations of brain ROT.
Basic SUBVERSION of const rights in election stuff in NY from date of NY law to now
— esp for NY minor parties / candidates.
@DR,
Why would I go to NY to determine who you (DR) would sue?
Just ignore Demo Rep. He’s an incoherent MORON.