Some South Carolina Excluded Major Party Candidates File Lawsuit in Federal Court

On May 4, some of the almost 200 excluded major party candidates filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court to seek relief. They were excluded from Democratic and Republican Party primary ballots. The primary is June 12. Also, some South Carolina legislators will try to rush through a bill to give some relief, that would take effect immediately.

Two days ago, the South Carolina Supreme Court removed the candidates, over paperwork. See this story. The mention of the federal lawsuit is at the end of the story.


Comments

Some South Carolina Excluded Major Party Candidates File Lawsuit in Federal Court — No Comments

  1. It might also be possible that the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the law must be pre-cleared under Section 5.

    The law which they interpreted has been in place since 1996, and requires that candidates file a statement of economic interest (SIE) at the same time they file their declaration of candidacy.

    There apparently was some confusion about when the SIE was due, and to whom it should be filed with. The party official who receives the SIE is supposed to forward it to the state ethics commission, but the the state ethics commission also permits electronic filing.

    It seems implausible that everyone has been complying with the law since 1996, and suddenly in 2012, 200 candidates mess up.

    Section 5 requires pre-clearance of any change in practice related to elections. So even if South Carolina had pre-cleared the statute, it might be that they did not put that statute into practice.

    But now the court order is implementing a new practice. Does it matter that it simply a straightforward interpretation of a law that was ignored?

    I’m pretty sure that there was a court case in South Carolina related to its (con)fusion laws, which had been interpreted one way, and then an attempt was made to interpret them in a way that was logical and consistent with the language of the statutes, and that was considered a change in practice.

    I think the principle of the Supreme Court decision applies to minor party candidates as well. They are required to make a declaration of candidacy for nomination by convention. The plaintiffs sought to have the candidates kept off the primary ballot, which may effectively keeping them off the general election ballot. What is to prevent a later court case to keep the minor party candidates off the general election ballot?

  2. Pingback: SC News, Politics, Personalities, Newsmakers, Warren Lasch

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.