On February 27, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Greene v Bartlett, 11-868, which challenged the number of signatures required for an independent candidate for U.S. House in North Carolina. The requirement is 4% of the number of registered voters. The law also requires a filing fee of 2% of the annual salary of the office. The requirement is generally between 16,000 and 20,000 signatures.
That law is so strict, no independent candidate for U.S. House has ever appeared on a government-printed ballot in North Carolina, and government-printed ballots have existed in that state since 1901. However, in 2010, the Service Employees International Union successfully completed the petition for a candidate who then refused to run, so the state seized on this incident as evidence that the requirement is not impossible to fulfill. No one has ever revealed how much that petition cost, but it was probably at least $50,000.
The U.S. Supreme Court said in 1974 in Storer v Brown, and again in 1977 in Mandel v Bradley, that ballot access laws that are so difficult, they are seldom used are probably too difficult and should be struck down. No one knows why the Court doesn’t take ballot cases in which the lower court disregards these precedents.
One more botched up ballot access case by the usual suspect MORON lawyers ???
Separate is NOT equal.
Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
Each election is NEW.
Too difficult for the appointed robot party hack SCOTUS folks to understand ???
#1, you have had your own ballot access lawsuits, and your lawsuits didn’t win either.
You mean Demo Rep has really done something besides post repetitive drivel? I am impressed!
# 2 Please tell the group THE ballot access case on THE EPC MERITS wherein Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954 was brought up and BBE was said by a SCOTUS gang of 5 of 9 to NOT to apply to ballot access ???
ALL sorts of folks lost in 1896-1954 in trying to get racial segregation over-ruled.
The WAR for REAL Democracy continues — regardless of armies of business-as-usual nay sayers using the many JUNK SCOTUS cases — on ALL sorts of constitutional law subjects.
See as one example Erie RR 1938 overuling about 98 years of scores of JUNK SCOTUS opinions about some sort of alleged *federal common law* — i.e. a JUNK legal classification dreamed up by the SCOTUS party hacks in circa 1842.
The main UNEQUAL ballot access cases by SCOTUS —
Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968),
Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431 (1971),
American Party of Texas v. White, 415 U.S. 767 (1974),
Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 (1986),
Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279 (1992) and
New York State Board of Elections v. Lopez Torres, 552 U.S. ____ (2008).
Good luck in finding ANY mention of Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954 in ANY of them.
SCOTUS plays its EVIL numbers game – be just good enough to political minorities so that they do not revolt.
——-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V
Equal nominating petitions.
ONE election day per cycle.
Difficult ONLY for certain folks.
Against my better judgement, I want to see case names and citations for Demo Rep’s ballot access lawsuits.
#6, if I did that, that would injure Demorep’s privacy, because that would reveal his name. But maybe he will make a comment, giving that information.
# 6 The cases are akin to those between 1896 to 1954 attacking racial segregation – now quite historically obsolete — due to the 2012 ballot access super-crisis NOW.
One of the U.S.A. Ct of Apps in a later case declared one of its earlier cases involving yours truly was de facto over-ruled by a later SCOTUS case.
This is one more super-distraction — like complaining that the First Battle of Bull Run in July 1861 did NOT win the Civil War for the Union.
When will a PROPERLY done ballot access case be done — with a REAL chance of OVER-ruling ALL of the JUNK cases in 5 ???
The New Age MORON ballot access lawyers keep repeating the same old BAD arguments and keep getting the same old BAD results from SCOTUS
— compounded by the now routine dilatory / flippant comments from the pre-school types on this list.
The U.S.A. is NOT a Democracy.
THAT is THE problem. Gerrymander oligarchs, executive monarchs and judge oligarchs run the regime — now direct into the ground (aka national bankruptcy and statism).
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Pingback: U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear North Carolina Ballot Access Case | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
Amazing! We Christians need to spread the Gospel. Our youth need to rise up as leaders in the church. There are Bible Studies going on in my school and God is using me to witness to my teachers and friends, the Lord is doing a great work here. It has been amazing through the gifts of the Spirit and the power of God has been moving. Praise the Lord. Youth, Lets reach our world!