Iowa Supreme Court Won’t Put Libertarian U.S. House Candidates Back on Ballot

On September 11, the Iowa Supreme Court refused to put the Libertarian candidates for U.S. House back on the ballot. See this story. The party nominated three candidates for U.S. House by party meeting. The county and precinct conventions that nominated them were held on the same day, but the law says they can’t be on the same day.

UPDATE: here is the decision in Gluba v State Objections Panel, 24-1426.


Comments

Iowa Supreme Court Won’t Put Libertarian U.S. House Candidates Back on Ballot — 16 Comments

  1. I don’t like this decision as much as anyone else, but we have to follow the election laws until we can change them.

  2. Appeal the decision in federal court on the basis of Eu v San Francisco. Even if it is not decided in time for the election, the issue is NOT moot, and could set a new precedent in favor of party rules over state election rules.

  3. @Richard Winger,

    You keep repeating the same mistake over and over. The technical fault was that they held precinct caucuses and county conventions the same night. Under state law, delegates to the county convention do not take office until the day after the precinct caucuses. County conventions elect delegates to congressional district conventions. Since the county conventions were improperly constituted, the congressional district conventions in filling the nomination vacancies were invalid.

    People are no doubt familiar with the Iowa caucuses. Under state law, the function of a precinct caucus is to elect delegates to the county convention. Beginning in 1972, presidential nomination was grafted onto the process. Instead of a precinct choosing, for example, five delegates to the county convention based on interest, they were chosen based on presidential preference. Pre-1972, you might get 10 people at a caucus. 3 would be party activists. You would have to convince two others to go to a county convention. “What day is the convention?” “Saturday week.” “Oh, I’m going to um something that day. Work has been really busy. I haven’t had time to keep up with darning or um other stuff.”

    Once they grafted presidential nomination onto the process more voters were interested in participating and candidates began to spend the previous year in Iowa.

    But the law has never changed. Functionally it makes no sense to have a county convention on the same night as the precinct caucuses. The delegates would have to travel to the county seat for a late night meeting.

    But for a smaller party (e.g. Libertarians) they likely would have few (or no) persons at most precinct caucuses. You can have multiple caucuses at one location. So you hold the precinct caucuses in different rooms (or rows of chairs), elect all of the persons to the county convention and hold the county convention. The county convention elects delegates to the congressional district and state conventions.

    There is also a requirement that county auditors be informed of the county delegates. None of this was done and the precinct and county conventions were apparently informal (no agenda, minutes, etc.). For the Democrats and Republicans they have cookbooks to follow procedure and phone banks if they get confused.

    Iowa chooses congressional and legislative nominees in primaries. But the petition requirements are huge for a small party. They require 1726 signatures, with 47 from half of the counties in the congressional district. Note these numbers are not percentages of anything. The statute literally says 1726 (or maybe one thousand seven hundred twenty six).

    If we assume that every voter who voted for the Libertarian gubernatorial candidate in 2022 was a potential signer for a congressional candidate, roughly 24% of them would have had to sign a petition. So there were no Libertarian candidates for congressional nomination.

    Iowa does permit vacancies in nomination to be filled, and that was the procedure the Libertarians attempted to use. The court determined that the nominations made at congressional district conventions were not valid since the county conventions that chose the delegates to the congressional conventions were not held at a proper date.

  4. @Nuña,

    The Iowa Supreme Court opinion opines:

    “But many election rules are arbitrary and hyper-technical in the same
    sense.”

  5. @WZ,

    Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Party concerned internal matters of political parties, not the nomination of public officers.

  6. @Jim Riley

    That makes it sound like the Iowa Supreme Court don’t know the rationale behind the law themselves.

    I have no opinion either way about whether or not county and state conventions should be able to be held on the same day. I’m just curious about why they shouldn’t be – and there may well be a very good reason for that. The only thing I can think of, is as an excessive means of ensuring that delegates are able to attend both conventions, however, that could have been legislated in a far more elegant way. But if even the state supreme court doesn’t know, then maybe – just maybe – it might be time to get rid of that law.

  7. @Nuña

    Yes, an appeal to the federal courts could argue like in Anderson v Trump, that the state Supreme Court got it wrong for the same reason SCOTUS came down on them on. The question of substantial vs strict compliance for qualifying for federal offices by the political party qualifying is an important one. This question of qualifying is a federal question, not the states.

  8. @Nuña,

    You are still misunderstanding what happened.

    In Iowa,

    (A1) Precinct caucuses choose members of county central committees and delegates to county conventions.
    (A2) County conventions choose delegates to congressional district and state conventions (and perhaps representatives on state central committees).
    (A3) Congressional district and state conventions choose delegates to national conventions.

    The above part is all about party organization. The only strict requirement is when precinct caucuses are held – and that county conventions be held on a _later_ date(s?) of the party’s choosing. The county delegates must be reported to county auditors.

    Since 1972, parties have grafted presidential nomination onto the organizational process. Instead of a few voters who would show up to choose delegates to a county convention; more show up to choose delegates to county conventions based on presidential preference. This is not required by Iowa law, but something the duopoly parties have chosen to do. The Democrats did it in in 1972, and the Republicans began in 1976.

    Instead of choosing Inga, Olga, Walter, and Adam to be delegates; caucus attendees would gather in groups based on presidential preference. The largest group might then choose Inga and Olga; while two smaller groups would choose Walter and Adam, respectively.

    The Libertarian Party became a qualified party based on their 2022 gubernatorial performance. They held precinct caucuses on the night specified under state law. They apparently did not inform the county auditors of county delegates. They did have a straw poll:

    https://lpia.org/2024/01/16/press-release-results-of-the-2024-lpia-iowa-caucus-presidential-straw-poll/

    Note that the quantization of percentages means that 89 persons voted. I did find evidence of precinct caucuses/county convention for three counties that I checked: Polk (Des Moines), Johnson (Iowa City/U of Iowa), Story (Ames/Iowa State). It was bitter cold in Iowa on January 15 (-17 F). There was nobody who was not wearing a coat or jacket (indoors).

    In Iowa, candidates of qualified parties are nominated by primary. To qualify for the primary ballot a petition is required. For Congress, 1726 signatures are required, including 47 from each of half the counties in the district. For a smaller party this would be almost impossible to achieve. If we assume that voters who voted for a Republican or Democratic governor would be disinclined to sign a Libertarian petition, and those who didn’t vote are largely indifferent to politics, then a Libertarian candidate for Congress might need 25% of “Libertarians” to sign his petition.

    The Libertarians did nominate three legislative candidates. One is facing a Republican (no Democrat), one a Democrat (no Republican) and one with a D and R. If there is no D candidate, an L will attract support from some D voters. Representatives need 50 signatures and senators 100. These are within the range of an energetic candidate. People will be more likely to respond to the candidate personally.

    A party may fill a vacancy in nomination by a convention held after the primary. This is the procedure used by the Libertarian candidates for Congress. What the court has decided is that the congressional district conventions making the nominations were illegitimate because the county conventions that chose the delegates were not held at least one day after the precinct caucuses.

    If the Libertarians had waited 181 minutes (from 9 pm to 12:01 am) before convening the county convention they would have been legal.

    *****

    It is possible that Richard Winger is conflating the method that RFKjr used to qualify as an independent candidate in Iowa. Independent candidates for statewide office can qualify by two methods. (1) Conventional petitions with 3500 signatures; or (2) 500 voters at a state convention, with at least one attendee from 25 counties. It was the latter method used by RFK. The attendees from the other counties aren’t chosen at county conventions, they only have to live in the county and be willing to drive to the convention (in West Des Moines). The convention was the week after the Women’s Final Four, so it wasn’t like there was anything else to do in Iowa.

    The RFKjr convention had 686 attendees from 36 counties. They have to sign the convention roster – which probably looks a lot like a petition. Kennedy spoke at the convention/rally so there was at least some sense of mass gathering. Perhaps voters were organized by county (or maybe that happened if several had car pooled).

  9. @Hector Roos

    I don’t like tying this – or any other case – back to the Anderson v Trump case, because it saw a very sloppy ruling that arrived at the correct conclusion for all the wrong reasons. In particular, there is nothing wrong with creating a patchwork of ballot access across the nation.

    As long as a state follows federal election laws (which are general to the type of election, not particular to any election cycle, party or candidate), then that state should be able to implement that election however it sees fit in each particular, regardless of whether it is a federal election.

    The Iowa supreme court presumably followed Iowa law in barring these three candidates from the ballot. I am NOT contending that this is a federal question. I’m merely questioning what the rationale behind that law is; and, if even the court doesn’t know, whether that law shouldn’t be repealed.

    ———

    @Jim Riley

    “The only strict requirement is when precinct caucuses are held – and that county conventions be held on a _later_ date(s?) of the party’s choosing.”

    That’s exactly what I was asking about though: What is the rationale behind this requirement? Why do the county conventions need to be held on a later date than the precinct caucuses? Why can’t they be held later the same day, SO LONG AS the delegates chosen by the precinct caucuses have time to get to the county conventions?

    And similarly, why can’t state conventions be held later on the same day as county conventions, PROVIDED the state delegates chosen at the county conventions have enough time to get from their county conventions to the state convention?

    In large states, border counties are so far apart that this will be impossible, except through virtual attendance of the state convention, or by holding some county conventions outside of their counties at a location near(er) the state convention. But Iowa is small enough, and Des Moines central enough, that one could hold the state convention in Des Moines in the evening, and have delegates who were only chosen that morning in attendance from every county.

    Isn’t there some better rationale behind that law than mere logistical consideration?

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.