New York State Again Passes Restrictive Changes to Ballot Access Laws

On April 1, the New York legislature passed the ballot access restrictions that had been invalidated last month. They increase the vote test for qualified party status, and increase the number of signatures for statewide independent candidate petitions, and for the nominees of unqualified parties, from 15,000 to 45,000 signatures. See this story. The Governor signed the bill on April 1.

These changes had been invalidated on March 12 by a State Supreme Court, on the basis that the legislature had not passed them. Now the legislature has passed them. These changes were included in the budget bill passed on April 1.

Case law is very clear that states cannot increase the number of signatures for ballot access in the election year. The U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed Hudler v Austin, in which a Michigan law that was passed in April 1976 was invalidated (as to the 1976 election), not on the merits, but because it was being enforced for the 1976 election. 419 F.Supp. 1002, (e.d.Mi.), Aug. 18, 1976; affirmed, 430 U.S. 924 (1977).

On January 7, 2014, a U.S. District Court in Ohio said that the new petition requirements for unqualified parties passed by the legislature on November 6, 2013, could not be enforced for the 2014 election. The new petition requirements would have been 55,806 signatures, due July 2, 2014. Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, s.d., 2:13cv-953, 2014 wL 11515569.


Comments

New York State Again Passes Restrictive Changes to Ballot Access Laws — 4 Comments

  1. In the name of campaign finance “reform” people get fewer choices. How is this not voter suppression?

  2. They kept the non-severibility clause from before. So if there is a ruling against the new independent petitioning requirement (which does apply to presidential candidates) the whole public financing scheme is knocked out.

  3. Cuomo TYRANT regime — at more work.

    Major hype in media for C for Donkey Prez.

  4. Ongoing screwup of 14 amdt since 1868 —

    DP of STATE law.

    Possible also FED violations if State Hacks violate STATE law.

    Unfortunate EP Cl NOT put before DP Cl in 14 Amdt.

    ie — get rights, lose/deprive rights.

    See 1866 USA Civil Rights Act — Secs 1, 2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.