On February 1, 2024, the State of Texas filed its reply brief to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the ongoing litigation concerning that state’s ballot access laws.
Here is the Fifth Circuit Appeals Court Brief from the State of Texas.
Thanks to Oliver Hall for forwarding this brief to us.
ANY MENTION OF
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
No, because that has nothing to do with this you fucking retard.
AZ where did you get your law degree? The University of Retardistan?
SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL MEANS ZERO IN BALLOT ACCESS LAWS ???
MEANS ZERO IN ZERO IQ TROLL MORON *BRAINS*
I seem to recall that courts have ruled that equal protection doesn’t apply to ballot access if a state has a “compelling state interest” to prevent the ballot from being “cluttered” with “nuisance” candidates.
ELECTIONS– ONE OF THE VERY FEW THINGS THAT STATES MUST DO
TO GIVE SOME APPEARANCE OF GOVTS OF, BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE.
REALITY – ALL STATES ARE ANTI-DEMOCRACY MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER REGIMES– MANY NOW DE FACTO GUV MONARCHIES — ESP IF GUV HAS CONTROL OVER STATE SUP CT JUDGES
—
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
I AM GOING TO POST GIBBERISH JUST LIKE AZ. NOTHING HE TYPES MAKES ANY FUCKING SENSE
—
THD
FEIDRKFD
EIEIO
THIS SOUNDS LIKE A PURGE LIST BY PRE SKOOOOOOOOOL MORONS
YE
FYEI
FTIWVHJYS
Calm down guys, focus on the Texas brief, not AZ.
I can think of an argument against “frivolous candidates” getting on the ballot: When they have a similar name to a major candidate, some voters could get confused and pick the wrong name. But I can also think of two ways to avoid this without restricting ballot access: Party rows (a grid format where candidates of the same party but running for different offices are along the same row), and all write-ins.
They quoted Storer v Brown:
“Standing alone, gathering 325,000 signatures in 24 days would not appear to be an impossible burden. Signatures at the rate of 13,542 per day would be required, but 1,000 canvassers could perform the task if each gathered 14 signers a day.”
325,000 signatures
/ 80% (signature validity rate)
/ 6 days (3 weekends available for volunteers)
/ 14 signers per canvasser per day (???)
—————————————-
= 4,800 canvassers, not 1,000
Paid petitioners will not work 24 days in a row and could be seen as an undue financial burden.
Texas, how can a Supreme Court decision with incorrect math be considered precedent?
Paid petitioners will work 24 days in a row for the right amount.
The district court decision is silly. That is why both sides are appealing it.
Primary candidates for the two grifter parties are listed on the SOS website:
https://candidate.texas-election.com/Elections/getQualifiedCandidatesInfo.do
Filings for the grifter party primary are with state and county party chairs, not with the SOS or county election officials. But those party chairs are required to post these to the SOS website. They are given an account and password. The SOS provides storage, and internet access, but IS not responsible for the content. The primaries are conducted by the two grifter parties in each of 254 counties. So for President and US Senator and every multi-county district race, the state party chair has to inform the county parties so that they may prepare ballots. The state party tells the county party chairs to go check out the SOS website (just like you could do). In olden days, the state party chair would use e-mail, certified mail, telegram, or carrier pigeon to pass these lists down.
The lawsuit notes that independent candidates have to use paper petitions. The district court decided that because the grifter parties can use computers it is not fair that independent candidates have to use paper, even though they are for different purposes, and that some grifter candidates also must file paper petitions, that it violates equal protection. Texas is appealing that part of the decision.
The district court rejected the substantive equal protection claims illustrated by this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1umDm44yx4
An independent candidate for statewide office such as governor must gather a large number of signatures (45,000 in 2006, 80,000 in 2024) in a short window of time, and from voters who did not vote in a primary.
In 2006, Kinky Friedman ran as an independent for governor. He needed 45,000 signatures in a short period of time, from voters who had not voted in either the Democratic or Republican primaries. The video is encouraging voters to not vote and save themselves so they may sign the Kinky Friedman petition.
Only two candidates in the 118 year history of this procedure have succeeded.
The State of Texas brief is defending this procedure.
HOW MANY TROLL MORONS AT SUPER-BOWL TODAY RAVING FOR BIDEN / TRUMP / UNEQUAL BALLOT ACCESS LAWS ????
What the fuck are you even talking about? Please get some mental help.
@Adam: Gene Kelly was long a perennial candidate here in Tex-ass, but, IIRC, on the Dems ballot, not any third party.
@Jim: You nailed it (with the exception that I think Kenny Boy has finally stopped fighting the electronic signatures issue)
And, in an op-ed about two months ago in my paper, I reminded people that if they wanted to sign an independent presidential candidate petition this year that they could not vote in the primary. (My county is 80 percent or so Rethug; at least Doinks are running for state senate this year in my area, tho still no state house candidate.)
@SG,
I thought Kenny Boy was Ken Lay. You may be talking about Sleazy Ken.
The SOS appealed the electronic signature issue. That opened up the cross-appeal from the plaintiffs.
Meanwhile in other news, the Texas Nationalist Movement has called on Governor Abbott to call a special session on Texit.
A better example of voter confusion might be Don Yarbrough, who voters may have confused with Don Yarborough or Ralph Yarborough, who won a Democratic primary for SCOTX justice and thus was elected. He resigned before he could be impeached. He was then convicted of various crimes, but fled the country to Grenada while the case was on appeal. Grenada refused extradition. Somehow he was tricked into coming to St. Vincent & the Grenadines for a conference where he was arrested and brought back to the USA.
Gene Kelly came pretty close to beating John Cornyn in his first election to SCOTX in 1990. He was the Democratic candidate for US Senator in 2000. I think he was a serious candidate early on, who became a perennial candidate as time went on. His later campaigns were on the lines of “I think the voters know where I stand.”
Ignore Robert K Stock’s trolling personality. He’s just a retarded communist.
Make my tidy whitey briefs Brown and spank me with a board of education!