U.S. District Court Upholds New York Petition Requirement, and Definition of a Qualified Party, in Error-Filled Decision

On December 22, U.S. District Court John G. Koeltl, a Clinton appointee, upheld the New York statewide petition requirement for independent candidates and the nominees of unqualified parties. He also upheld the new definition of a political party, a group that polled 2% of the vote every two years for the office at the top of the ballot (Governor in midterm years, and president in presidential years). SAM Party of New York v Kosinski, s.d., 1:20cv-323. Here is the 37-page opinion.

Judge Koetl issued the opinion less than 24 hours after the oral argument. His opinion has serious factual errors. Page 23 says New York requires the seventh highest number of signatures, when actually New York has the fourth highest number of signatures for president. His statement is based on errors concerning California, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina. The document he relied on says Pennsylvania requires 57,913 signatures, when actually it requires 5,000 signatures as the result of a 2012 court decision, Constitution Party of Pennsylvania v Aichele. The document he relied on for North Carolina says that state requires 82,542 signatures, when actually a new party needs 13,757 signatures. The document he relied on for California says California requires 220,474 signatures in 2022. Actually it is impossible to petition onto the California general election ballot in a midterm year, and no one needs more than 65 signatures to petition onto the primary ballot.

Page twenty-three says New York is “in the middle of the pack” regarding its 2% vote test for party status, but he doesn’t mention that the typical state lets a vote for any statewide race count towards party qualification, whereas New York requires 2% for president, in a presidential year. Evidence in the case, but ignored by Judge Koetl, shows that it is far easier for a minor party to poll 2% for a lesser statewide race than for president.

Page twenty-one mentions precedents from other states upholding vote tests more difficult than 2%, but the opinion does not say that all of those states (Oklahoma, North Carolina, and Arkansas) have a procedure by which a group that fails the vote test can regain its party status before the next election, with a petition. New York has no such procedure.

Pages four and twenty-three say the increase in the vote test, which was last changed in 1935, is justified because the state has four times the population it had in the 1930’s. But he doesn’t say that the number of votes cast has not even doubled. In 1936 New York cast 5,596,399 votes for president; in 2020 it cast 8,594,826, an increase of 53.6%, not 300%. Clearly the number of votes cast is more relevant than the population.

The opinion says the increases are needed to save money for the state’s public funding program. The decision does not say that the Second Circuit already ruled in Green Party of Connecticut v Garfield that if a state has public funding, it need not give the money to small qualified parties. The opinion also says the increases are needed to combat “ballot crowding”, but the state introduced no evidence about ballot crowding. To the extent that New York ballots are confusing, the state is free to switch to an office-group ballot.


Comments

U.S. District Court Upholds New York Petition Requirement, and Definition of a Qualified Party, in Error-Filled Decision — 28 Comments

  1. YET another LP ballot access LOSS with THE same olde rotted LP lawyers AND THEIR SAME OLDE J-U-N-K ARGUMENTS.

    When in HELL will the LP get any lawyers able to detect EQUAL in 14-1 Amdt ???

    EQUAL BALLOT ACCESS TEST(S) FOR INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES — WITH OR WITHOUT ANY PARTY LABELS.
    —-
    PR
    APPV
    TOTSOP

  2. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1971 that ballot access need not be equal. It upheld the Georgia law that didn’t require any signatures for Democrats and Republicans to get on the primary ballots, but which required a petition of 5% of the number of registered voters for everyone else. Therefore your suggestion is not a winning strategy.

  3. This sentence contains an error (extra reference to president):

    Evidence in the case, but ignored by Judge Koetl, shows that it is far easier for a minor party to poll 2% for president for a lesser statewide race than president.

  4. As RW knows –

    took 1896 to 1954 [mere 58 years] to get EQUAL education stuff for blacks –
    Brown v Bd of Ed — separate is NOT equal.

    SEPARATE and UNEQUAL ballot access junk since 1968 — mere 53 years.

    How many $$$ have losing so-called lawyers in LP ballot access cases received from the LP since 1968 ???

    Anon — many of such LP loser lawyers have been informed of what to do — but ignore research.

  5. Clearly, with that many “errors” the judge didn’t make errors, he spewed out nonsense in an attempt to provide cover for the Democrats and Republicans.

  6. Generally the attorneys who do ballot access constitutional cases don’t charge the client. They hope to win, and if they win then the state government pays their fees.

  7. I’m being kind of serious with this, should the Libertarian Party and other minor parties pass resolutions calling for the impeachment of John G. Koeltl for erred rulings? I know resolutions do nothing, but the purpose is to push back on Koeltl, future Koeltls, publicize and expose his blatant errors.

  8. Impeachments of judges have been more frequent than for presidents, and I think there was at least one instance of cause being “erred rulings”, so there’s precedent.

  9. It will lose there, too. And if by any chance it doesn’t, the Supreme Court will take the state’s appeal, rule for the State, and make things even worse. The era of slowly improving ballot access is over, sadly. Anything you might bring up to dispute that is a lagging indicator. I hate to be the bearer of bad news. I don’t like it either,but the new trend is clear.

  10. TOO late to change losing arguments in US Ct Apps and SCOTUS.

    Must be TOTAL change in persons doing ballot access cases —

    ie folks who can detect EQUAL in 14-1 Amdt.

  11. “Cicero on December 23, 2021 at 8:56 am said:
    It will lose there, too. And if by any chance it doesn’t, the Supreme Court will take the state’s appeal, rule for the State, and make things even worse. The era of slowly improving ballot access is over, sadly. Anything you might bring up to dispute that is a lagging indicator. I hate to be the bearer of bad news. I don’t like it either,but the new trend is clear.”

    Are you playing a fiddle as Rome, or, in this case, the USA, burns?

  12. Actually, that was Nero was was said to have played the fiddle while Rome burned.

    Cicero said this: “The budget should be balanced, the treasury refilled, public debt reduced, the arrogance of officialdom tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt.”

    This is good advice to follow today.

  13. USA ON/OFF BURNING SINCE 1960’S CITY RIOTS/INSURRECTIONS — ESP LA, DETROIT, NEWARK.

    NOW MERE AM GANG LOOTING WAVE ATTACKS – CHICAGO, ETC.

    ANY ARSON STUFF IN 6 JAN 2021 CAPITOL BLDG INVASION ???
    —-
    PR
    APPV
    TOTSOP

  14. Demo rep has no services that he could offer. Cranking out his comments here is literally all he’s got. He’s a crank who used to file his own frivolous lawsuits back when disco and polyester suits were the hot new trends. In his own words, he is not a government sanctioned lawyer. His advice is worth everything you’ve already paid for it, or less.

  15. How many LP losing ballot access cases and petitions since 1970 by the LP *establishment* ???

    Winning pct – under 0.100 ???

    Total $$$ costs for all winning and losing efforts ???

  16. Again, if Demo Rep Thomas Jones is so bright, why isn’t he offering his services? Has he been disbarred, or is he just that terrible of an attorney?

    All whining and no action.

  17. LP hack lawyers would NOT know winning ballot access and gerrymander arguments even if they were in 50 font type in a 50 pound con law book that hits them in their business-as-usual heads filled with BAAAAD/losing arguments since 1970.

    So-called law skoools graduating armies of BAAADE lawyers for many decades — top hacks of which, due to family/rich ties, get appointed to top party hack courts [esp SCOTUS] — up against rotating new crops of LP amateur so-called lawyers since 1970.

  18. Earl, he wasn’t disbarred because he was never an attorney. He’s a crazy person who used to file his own frivolous lawsuits without an attorney, before he became too crazy to even do that much, which was over 40 years ago. Then a few decades later the internet came along, and you can see what he’s done for his cause ever since then.

  19. Sorry – the super-CRAZY folks are those who keep repeating losing ballot access arguments —

    ALL PART OF THE LP *ESTABLISHMENT* — with its clubby troll moron hacks/supporters/agents.

    Esp the delusional NO govt anarchists mostly in control of the LP since 1970 —

    who have nonstop delusions that LP candidates should get on ballots easier than DD/RR candidates.

    What State since 1970 has had the most losing ballot access cases and has had to do multiple ballot access petitions ???

    $$$ cost per voter Sig in 1970 versus in 2021-2022 ???

  20. Delusions are what demo rep has if he thinks his constant organ grinding of comments on this website will ever make anything whatsoever happen in the real world, regardless of how many thousands of these comments he manages to litter this site with before he becomes too sick to type or dies. However bad any real world ballot access lawsuit record could possibly be, it’s better than his, which is exactly .000, and you can add as many zeros to that as you want. He extends that .000 record with each comment. His winning percentage in convincing anyone to do anything is also .000 with no signs that that will ever change.

  21. Dealing with zero IQ conlaw troll morons on BAN is good practice in dealing with the courts and media in the real world.

    Any better lawyers for other parties and independents than the LP loser lawyers — since 1970 ???

    For non-trolls —
    Separate is NOT equal. Brown v Bd of Ed 1954
    Each election is NEW.
    INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES ARE NOMINATED/ELECTED — NOT *PARTIES*.
    EQUAL IN 14-1 AMDT — NOTE TO ALSO GET BALLOT ACCESS FOR ELEPHANTS IN EX-SLAVE SECESS/REBEL STATES.

    IE US GRANT ON ALL BALLOTS IN 1868 + 1872.

  22. Why practice for something and never do it? If you were going to do something other than “practice” you would have done it by now. Time is running short…tick tock. You can deride people with a better batting average than you all you want, but the fact remains that your batting average is still .000, you haven’t been at bat in a game in over 40 years and seem…highly unlikely … to ever be in one again, and can’t get anyone to take you on as a coach for free.

    Call all the names and repeat your mantras all you want but these facts have not and won’t change. There’s a solid reason no one wants you to coach, even for free, starting with your .000 average as a player. That’s just reality, like it or not. Oh and, Merry Christmas! Ho ho ho!

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.