On November 15, the Alaskan Independence Party filed its opening brief in the Alaska Supreme Court, in the challenge to the top-four system passed by the voters in November 2020. Kohlhaas v State, S-18210.
On November 15, the Alaskan Independence Party filed its opening brief in the Alaska Supreme Court, in the challenge to the top-four system passed by the voters in November 2020. Kohlhaas v State, S-18210.
What do you guys think the top four crypto coins should be? Have you considered Himalaya Coin?
Definitely!
Alaska includes political groups on its voter registration forms. Scott Kohlhaas should inform his lawyer of the error on Page 8.
Kohlhaas seeks to interfere with the political association rights of individual citizens and voters to join together in support of individual candidates. The system he prefers depends on voters making a public record of their political beliefs simply to vote in a partisan primary where the choices are controlled and restricted by political appartchiks like himself.
Jim, Alaska formerly did what you say, but stopped printing the names of unqualified parties because they had so many. The instructions for the form does list the unqualified parties but they are no longer on the form itself.
@RW,
The instructions are on the back of the paper form.
http://www.elections.alaska.gov/doc/forms/C03-Fill-In.pdf
I can’t do the online registration without being an Alaska resident. I assume the list is in a pop-up. Do you know anyone in Alaska who could check?
Further the monthly registration statistics show continued growth in registration with ALL political groups. That only happens when choices are presented to new registrants. Someone who goes to the DMV and is asked if they want to register won’t say OK? and then write-in UCES Clowns.
The Top 4 initiative explicitly provides that a candidates affiliation with a Political Group be shown on the ballot. If the registration form did not treat Political Groups the same form would be in violation of equal protection.
The brief is not only factually incorrect, it inverts the liability. If the form is inconsistent with the new statute then the form should be changed. The brief argues that if the new statute is inconsistent with the old form, it is the new statute that is invalid.
Are ballot access cases assigned to the dumbest govt so-called lawyers ???
— ie relatives of top party hacks ???