On July 22, No Labels filed its brief in the Ninth Circuit in No Labels Party v Fontes, 24-563. This is the case on whether a party has a freedom of association right to block anyone from running in its primary for offices for which the party doesn’t want candidates. No Labels only wanted a presidential candidate.
No Labels is no longer participating in elections, but both sides want the issue to be settled. This will be an interesting case on the constitutional rights of political parties.
PARTY = FACTION / FRACTION OF ALL VOTERS
PUBLIC NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS FOR PUBLIC OFFICES BY PUBLIC LAWS.
PARTIES NOT INDEPENDENT EMPIRES
No Labels is no longer participating in elections = MOOT CASE
It seems a shame that the catalyst for such a case, had to be a party that didn’t manage to field a presidential candidate and wasn’t interested in seeking any lower offices.
Dear No Labels, now will you please be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can’t justify your existence, if you are not interested in running for any office besides the presidency, if you cannot even be bothered to field a candidate for that office, then clearly there is no use for you, because your party does not benefit any voter, and it can’t be very much more than a scam to yourself either…
It’s been known to be a scam from the get go. Some of us have said it all along.
There are two candidates running in Washington and Alaska blanket primaries as candidates of the No Labels Party. So ballot-designated members of the No Labels Party are in fact participating on elections. In Arizona many early voters have already sent back No Labels Party ballots in the July 30 primary (blank except for nonpartisan city or other local candidates).
The scam will do whatever they can to sue them off the ballot.
Candidates should qualify as individuals. For statewide elections have 100 voters X the number of congressional districts appear at county courthouses. For a November election this could occur in September.
If a party wishes to make endorsements, send a roster of members to the state government in electronic form, including voter identification. Contact information in the form of a phone number or e-mail address is optional. The roster should contain contain a small margin beyond the required amount (perhaps 10%). The government can then verify membership by sampling.
NOOO EXTREMIST CAUCUSES / PRIMARIES / CONVENTIONS
ONE VOTER NOM PET FORMS — TO BE SECRET FOR SAME REASONS AS SECRET ELECTION BALLOTS
How do I make sure AZ did not vote twice. How do I make sure that AZ did not sign a petition twice?
AZ would totally commit fraud. No doubt in my mind.
Bots cannot commit fraud.
JR – 12-20 PM —
SAME RE JR
—
JR EVER HAVE SOME *SECRET* STUFF IN A COURT CASE ???
BY HIM OR OTHER LAWYER IN THE CASE ???
@AZ,
There are public records of AZ having voted.
Why shouldn’t there be public records of you having signed a candidate petition?
Do you fully trust Jocelyn Benson to count your signature?
Bots aren’t supposed to vote.