On August 21, the Second Circuit explained why it had refused injunctive relief to Jim Walden.  He is an independent candidate for Mayor of New York City.  Election officials had refused to let him choose “Independence” as his ballot label.  State law says no party can have “Independence” or “Independent” as its name, or as part of its name.  UPDATE:  here is a Courthouse News Story about the decision.  The article is unusual; Courthouse News Service stories don’t generally reach out to the losing side in a decision to ask for a reaaction.

Walden had sued, but lost in U.S. District Court.  He had appealed, but on May 2, the Second Circuit agreed with the lower court and said he can’t use his preferred label.

At the time, the Second Circuit did not explain its reasoning, but said it would do so later.  Now, it has explained.  Here is the 49-page decision.  On page 45 it explains the state interest in denying the label “Independence.”  It says, “It could lead unaffiliated voters to mistakenly believe that this designation was intended to represent all unaffiliated/independent voters, rather than identify a specific political organization.”  This is a very paternalistic sentence.  Free speech is protected by the First Amendment, even though free speech often means that deceptive or confusing messages are allowed.

One could use the same reasoning to say that the state should outlaw any party from having “Democratic” in its name, because that might lead people to think that the Democratic Party was intended to represent all voters who believe in democracy.

The decision is by Judge Eunice C. Lee, a Biden appointee.  It is also signed by Judges Gerald E. Lynch and Alison Nathan, Obama appointees.