On May 10, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued an opinion in Martin v Simon, A24-0216. It immediately removes the Legal Marijuana Now Party from the ballot, even though the party has already had a government-administered presidential primary this year and was about to have a primary for congress and state office August 13. The deadline for candidates to file in that primary is June 4, less than a month away.
The vote is 5-0. The Minnesota Supreme Court has seven members. Two justices, Margaret Chutich and Karl Procaccini, did not participate. All members of the court except one were appointed by Democratic Governors.
On February 6, the Minnesota Democratic Party had filed the lawsuit to remove the Legal Marijuana Now Party on the basis that the party failed to maintain a state central committee subject to the state convention’s control. There was no allegation that any member of the party objected to the party’s less formal procedure. The U.S. Supreme Court had ruled in 1989 in Eu v San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee that the First Amendment’s Freedom of Association clause protects a party’s right to determine its own structure, and that should have caused the lawsuit to be rejected. The California Libertarian Party, which was a co-plaintiff, had won that lawsuit, because it objected to a state law telling the party to have a state central committee based on county central committees, and the party preferred to have regions of its own choosing rather than counties as the basic units.
Unfortunately, however, in 1979 in Marchioro v Cheney, ten years before the Eu decision, the U.S. Supreme Court had upheld a Washington state law that required a qualified party to have a state central committee with two members from each county. That is the only precedent the Minnesota Supreme Court mentioned in its summary of its own decision, See page four. The Marchioro decision is widely considered to be obsolete, and in any event the Court had felt the Washington law didn’t hurt the Washington Democratic Party (which had brought the case) because a party was free under Washington law to provide that the state central committee have virtually no power within the party.
The Legal Marijuana Now Party had also argued that the Purcell Principle prevents a court from making a change to election procedures very close to a primary or an election. But the Minnesota Supreme Court said that the Purcell Principle, which was created in 2006 by the U.S. Supreme Court, only applies to federal courts, not state courts.
The Minnsota Supreme Court did not mention any court precedents that say ballot access rules cannot be made more restrictive in the middle of the campaign season. The leading such case is Hudler v Austin, a 3-judge U.S. District Court decision from Michigan in 1976 that was summarily affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, 430 U.S. 924. The Minnesota law that made the Legal Marijuana Now Party vulnerable was passed in 2023, and signed May 23.
The Minnesota Supreme Court did not mention Williams v Rhodes, the 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Ohio ballot access laws for new parties. In that opinion, Justice William O. Douglas wrote a concurrence when he suggested one reason the Ohio law was unconstitutional was that it required new parties to have a big formal structure.
The Legal Marijuahna Now Party will ask for U.S. Supreme Court involvement.
PARTY STRUCTURES- ALL FAIL TO COMPLY WITH ONE PARTY MEMBER – ONE VOTE — NAMELY — TO FILL VACANCIES IF PARTY CANDIDATE DIES/ ETC IN ELECTION TIME PERIOD
———–
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2024/05/10/biden-white-house-highlights-coming-showdown-gop-over-2017-tax-cuts-due-expire/73641812007/
Biden White House highlights a coming showdown with GOP over 2017 tax cuts that are due to expire
Josh Boak
Associated Press
Washington — The winner of November’s presidential election will face an epic challenge next year with the coming expiration of nearly $4 trillion in tax cuts — an issue that the Biden White House is highlighting in the runup to November.
“The U.S. Supreme Court had ruled in 1989 in Eu v San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee that the First Amendment’s Freedom of Association clause protects a party’s right to determine its own structure, and that should have caused the lawsuit to be rejected.”
Exactly.
Failure to distinguish between a party committee (private) and a ballot line (public).
Hopefully, they’ll get rid of legal marijuana next.
Both major parties have become so obsessed with eliminating third parties that they don’t care if they make bad law, or set bad precedent in the process.
Looks like the Democratic leadership is pretty ruthless in Minnesota! And Montana. And North Carolina. And New York.
Yes, Scott, you are right. You could have added Democratic state legislatures in New Mexico in 2023. And in 2020, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. And this year, Hawaii.
Redpath always says it’s Republicans who kick parties off the ballot. He is a liar.
Republicans aren’t perfect. A Republican-majority legislature in Arizona passed a law making it almost impossible for the Libertarian Party to run any candidates for congress or state office. A Republican-majority legislature in Florida passed a 2011 law taking away the right of most ballot-qualified parties to run someone for president unless they file a petition signed by 1% of the registered voters. The Republican legislature of Georgia keeps the nation’s worst ballot access law in force; it has kept all minor parties off the ballot for regularly-elected US House elections since it was passed 81 years ago. California Republicans in the legislature in 2009 put the top-two ballot measure on the ballot. The Indiana Republican legislature always defeats the ballot access reform bill that is repeatedly introduced by a Democrat. The Iowa Republican legislature has twice made ballot access worse in the last 5 years. The Louisiana Republican legislature this year made ballot access much worse for minor party candidates for office other than president. The Texas Republican legislature imposed filing fees on minor party candidates that get nominated by convention.
R
“Redpath always says it’s Republicans who kick parties off the ballot”.
I talked with David Bergland about 6 months before he passed away about his impressions of which party attacked LP ballot access more than the other. He said that, of course, we had been assaulted many times by both parties. But his impression was that it was the Republicans who try to kick us off more than the Democrats. I think Arkansas would be the latest example.
The leadership in the Dems and Reps are not pluralists. I truly believe Libertarians are pluralists, and when we get our chance we will sweep away these un-American and immoral ballot access laws for all the parties and independents.
The major political parties come to believe that they are organs of the government because of their control of the legislature.
Eliminate state recognition of political parties, and individual voters may organize to support candidates.
UNEQUAL BALLOT ACCESS LAWS
+ MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDERS
+ PARTISAN HACK EXECS/JUDICS
= USA POLITICAL COMMIE/FASCIST ROT 2024. >>> USA/STATE TYRANT MONARCHS/OLIGARCHS
AS ROTTED AS ANY IN OLDE EUROPE/ASIA
—
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ohio-lawmakers-sink-plan-biden-224622143.html
OHIO – BIDEN STATUS – 90 DAYS MACHINATION
NO SUMMER VACATION FOR SCOTUS AND THEIR CLERKS ???
Eliminate individuals who do not choose a political party. Immediate death penalty for anyone refusing to choose a recognized party.
ABOLISH DEATH PENALTY PARTY ???
WZ
Marchioro v Cheney 1979 – WAS A FOOTNOTE IN 1989 EU
Right, footnote 22. Justice Marshall should instead have said Marchioro v Cheney is overruled.
https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/Appellate/Supreme%20Court/Special%20Releases/OPA240216-05102024.pdf
MN SUP CT OP
EMERGENCY APPEAL TO SCOTUS NEXT WEEK ???
— AKIN TO TRUMP 14-3 EMERGENCY APPEAL ???
Why should individuals be allowed to choose?
Good point. Parties should just draft them.
COURTS BRAIN DAMAGE –
PARTIES
1. PUBLIC NOMINATION PROCESS – FILL CANDIDATE VACANCIES — 1 PARTY MEMBER – ONE VOTE — FACTION OF ALL PUBLIC VOTERS – 14-1 AMDT
2. INTERNAL PRIVATE CLUBBY STUFF – 1 AMDT
Vote by party only. No candidates.
“All members of the court except one were appointed by Democratic Governors.”
And how many of them were picked by George Soros?
“the party failed to maintain a state central committee subject to the state convention’s control”
Yeah and my toast failed to fall butter-side down – so what?
“But the Minnesota Supreme Court said that the Purcell Principle, which was created in 2006 by the U.S. Supreme Court, only applies to federal courts, not state courts.”
Because of course a state court gets to place itself above federal laws whenever it so wishes. Meanwhile, states don’t get to decide their own certification deadlines for presidential elections, because “oh no, the big scary patchwork is coming for voters”, or something. What a banana republic.
Standing count Stan is correct.
Minnesota is now one of 12 states with no ballot-qualified parties other than Dem and Rep. Minnesota has the nation’s fifth most severe definition of a party (8% vote; only Virginia, New Jersey, Alabama and Pennsylvania are higher). Minnesota has the only petition procedure for qualifying a new party that is so severe, it has never been used. It was passed in 1913, requires 5% of the last vote cast, and no one has ever done it. Not even Americans Elect or No Labels attempted it.
The retard party will try. We think we can.
Chas,
How about press gangs?
STATE MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER HACKS GETTING COMMAND ORDERS FRON DNC/RNC AND/OR TOP HACKS IN CONGRESS / WHITE HOUSE — TO WIPE OUT ALL 3RD PARTIES/ INDEES ???
Both major parties now say that if the other major party wins, the country will collapse.
They may both be right.
@Richard Winger
“Minnesota has the only petition procedure for qualifying a new party that is so severe, it has never been used. It was passed in 1913, requires 5% of the last vote cast, and no one has ever done it.”
How did the Minnesota Farmer–Labor Party get around this (before it merged with the Democrats in 1944)?
The wikipedophiles tell me:
“The Minnesota Farmer–Labor Party emerged from the Non-Partisan League (NPL), which had expanded from North Dakota into Minnesota in 1918, and the Union Labor Party (ULP) of Duluth, Minnesota, which was founded in February 1918. In 1919, the NPL reorganized as the Working People’s Non-Partisan League (WPNPL). In February 1920, the ULP joined the WPNPL.”
Which would suggest that even the antecedents of the party were either founded or expanded into Minnesota later than 1913.
“All members of the court except one were appointed by Democratic Governors” then this vote makes sense. After all, everyone knows the truth: that Democrats actually hate democracy.
We don’t hate democracy. We define it properly. Democracy is when the Democratic Party rules. We love democracy!