On August 26, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a three-page order in Strange v Wisconsin Election Commission, 2024AP164-OA. This is the lawsuit over whether Jill Stein should be on the ballot. The Green Party is a qualified party in Wisconsin. A very old election law says qualified parties should nominate their presidential elector candidates on October 1 at the State Capitol, and the meeting should be attended by that party’s state legislators and others who are nominees for the legislature that year.
The challenger said because the Green Party doesn’t have any candidates for state legislature this year, it can’t legally nominate presidential elector candidates. This ignores the historical fact that as long as this law has existed (probably for over 100 years), the state has never said that this is the only way qualified parties may nominate presidential elector candidates.
The order says, “We determine that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief he seeks.” The petitioner in this case is David Strange, who is a staffer for the Wisconsin Democratic Party.
The Associated Press’s title is “Green Party’s Jill Stein will remain on Wisconsin ballot after court refuses to hear challenge” OOF, the courts didn’t even want to HEAR that corrupt Democrat BS! They said “thank you, next!”
In a sense, though, the Supreme Court did hear it. They had ordered the briefs to be filed quickly, then they read the briefs and came to a conclusion that the objector “is not entitled to the relief he seeks.” I would say the AP is not being strictly accurate.
This ruling is a welcome surprise. Glad to see an independent judiciary still exists in some parts of the country. That law is clearly unconstitutional, and the legislature and governor ought to repeal it, especially now that they’ve seen they can’t use it to sue minor party and Independent opposition off of ballots.
Good news. Thanks for outing the failed complainant’s party affiliation. This year’s repeated behavior of Democratic Party members trying to stifle ballot competition has been vile.
I understand that from a prior post, Wisconsin’s governor filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Democrats to try to keep the Green Party off the ballot. Does anyone know if this a common practice for a sitting governor to try to wipe an opposition party off the ballot by filing an amicus brief?
Commie AP not accurate? No way!
Richard Winger. Tomorrow is final day to turn in petitions for Wyoming. Both Stein and Bobby were approved to collect signatures. Would be very interesting to see if either turns them in. In particular if Bobby’s team still does
HOW MANY DIFFERENT STATE MACHINATIONS RE 12 AMDT PREZ ELECTORS ???
50 OF 50 ???
ONE MORE INFAMOUS FATAL PATCHWORK ???
Meh. Federal courts will fix state supreme court error.
A law or rule ignored for a hundred years is not necessarily automatically moot. Some are late bloomers.
This is a welcome change from 2020.
* unwelcome