Last month, the Ninth Circuit had tentatively scheduled a November 2021 oral argument date in Mecinas v Hobbs, 20-16301. This is the case in which the Democratic Party challenges the Arizona law on the order of candidates on general election ballots. The U.S. District Court had upheld the law, which says that the party that won the gubernatorial election in any particular county enjoys having its nominees on the top line on the ballot.
In 2020, the Democratic Party had sued six states over the order of candidates, but this is the only surviving case. The party lost the others.
However, the Secretary of State of Arizona recently asked the Ninth Circuit for a delay in the proceedings, because on June 30, 2021, SB 1823 was signed into law. It says the Attorney General cannot represent the Secretary of State in court until 2023. It also forbids the Secretary of State from hiring an outside attorney. The bill says the Secretary of State can hire one in-house attorney, but the bill grants no funding to pay for that. So, the Secretary of State says the ballot order case must be delayed for two months until she can decide how to defend the state law.
The bill seems to have been motivated by partisan politics. The Secretary of State is a Democrat and the legislature has a Republican majority. See this story.
ALL States have ANTI-Democracy minority rule gerrymander regimes — since 1776 – carried over from rotted Brit regime since DARK AGE 1200s.
1/2 or less votes x 1/2 rigged gerrymander districts = 1/4 or less CONTROL.
Much much much worse extremist primary math.
—-
Party hacks in exec/judic offices.
>>> Top monarchs/oligarch gangsters in WAR for CONTROL of Govt $$$ IN/OUT.
—
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Don’t print any names on the ballot only a blank line for the voter to write in their candidate preference. That gives all candidates equal access to voters and voters access to all candidates.
How BAAAADDDEEE is New Age printing/handwriting ???
See 2010 AK Senate write-in votes.
Have Write-In courts meet for years ???
Let voters print their own ballots.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska
2010 M PLURALITY/MINORITY write-in — for the ages or what ???
All votes should be write in or print in.
“In 2020, the Democratic Party had sued six states over the order of candidates, but this is the only surviving case. The party lost the others”
The Democrats seem kind of obsessed over ballot order. Why is that?
Because they are losers.
WZ –
donkey statists need donkey voters —
see the top line donkey – vote for the top line donkey.
What percent of donkey voters are illiterate ???
— esp due to publik skoools ???
See many foreign ballots with all sorts of icons/symbols – animals / plants / math / candidate pics / etc.
I recall recently that someone posted that office holders should be chosen by lottery from the population. While I think that is a bit much, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that positions on the ballot should be determined by lottery.
Why is it a bit much? Sounds reasonable to me. Probably better than what we gave now.
It’s either that or let every voter print their own ballot.
“Why is it a bit much? Sounds reasonable to me. Probably better than what we gave now.”
Has it been tried anywhere?
Juries use it all the time. Lotteries are also a proven method of fundraising, including government revenue. I think the concept can be extended to include political leaders. I don’t know off the top of my head whether that has been tried yet, but it should be. Are you categorically opposed to trying anything new, ever? Innovation would be impossible if that was a universally applied rule.
@Ed:
I am hardly an opponent of new ideas. It’s always good, tho, to find examples in actual use.
But, here’s a thought, since you mentioned juries. Maybe people who have served on juries can go into a lottery for judicial electors. After all, having served on a jury, they have actual courtroom experience. It might also provide some incentive for people to accept jury duty.
How could this work? The names of all people who have served on a jury in a state would go into a lottery pool. Every year a certain number, say 100, would be drawn to serve for a year as judicial electors. They would approve/disapprove all nominees for judges in a state.
This could be expanded to the federal level. Every state could have a number of judicial electors equal to, but separate from, Presidential electors, chosen every two years to serve as the body to confirm/reject all federal judicial nominations. The states would be free to choose them any way they want, either by voters, by the legislature, or by lottery from people who have served in the state’s jury pool.
I like that idea.
Would *professional* juries be able to detect FALSE evidence any better than random juries ???
Earlier in England – special subject matter *business* juries — ship cases, contract cases, etc.
NOW – trial by jury is almost DEAD in the UK — a DARK AGE regime with NOOO *written* const.
— kept in power via USA dead/injured in WW I and WW II.
Professional juries would kinda go against the whole idea behind juries. Keep random juries, expand lotteries over other taxes, and expand the random choice concept to other civic service.