On November 20, the Ohio Libertarian Party filed this 36-page brief in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, 15-4270. It asks for expedited treatment, because the Ohio primary petition deadlines are due December 16, 2015.
On November 20, the Ohio Libertarian Party filed this 36-page brief in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, 15-4270. It asks for expedited treatment, because the Ohio primary petition deadlines are due December 16, 2015.
Ohio’s Constitution does not require parties to nominate by primary. At the time of Libertarian Party vs Blackwell Ohio statute did require parties to nominate by primary.
American Party of Texas vs White said that new parties and independent candidates are free to encourage voters to not participate in primaries (the mechanism by which voters “register” in Texas and Ohio).
‘Gottlieb v. Sulligan’ did not interpret Section 7, Article V of the Ohio Constitution. It said that in the particular circumstance of that case (filling a vacancy in nomination), that Section 27, Article II) prevailed.
The sentence that the brief quotes begins with “Under our statutes:”. That would be the statutes as they existed in 1969. The Ohio Supreme Court was not “interpreting the constitution”, it was quoting the text of a statute.
Libertarian Party of Ohio vs Blackwell was erroneous in attributing the requirement that parties nominate by primary as being part of the Ohio Constitution. The requirement was statutory – merely one possible implementation that would be consistent with the Ohio Constitution. And of course Section 7, Article V does not even mention political parties or political nominations.
That the Secretary of State or Attorney General may have argued otherwise is irrelevant. The General Assembly has the primary authority to interpret the constitution, with the judicial branch having a review authority.
Yes, the judicial branch does have review authority, and that is why the Libertarian Party is in court. So far no judge, federal or state, has issued a ruling agreeing with Jim’s interpretation.
Article V, sec. 7, Ohio Constitution: “All nominations for elective state, district, county and municipal offices shall be made at direct primary elections or by petition as provided by law.”
No court has ever interpreted Article V, Section 7.
The 6th Circuit in ‘Libertarian Party of Ohio v. Blackwell’ ruled that Ohio’s statutory scheme, as it existed at that time, violated the US Constitution. It may have erroneously believed that the statute was required by the Ohio Constitution, but that would have had no impact on the decision either way.
In ‘Gottlieb v. Sulligan’, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Section 7, Article V did not apply to nominations to fill partisan vacancies.
The plaintiffs had argued since the nomination (to fill a nomination vacancy) was clearly not by primary; and therefore, in accord with the constitution, must have been by petition. They were not arguing that a partisan nomination by petition violated the constitution, but rather that a partisan nomination that was not by primary must have been by petition. But if it were by petition, then it would have violated the sore loser statute.
The Ohio statutes now extend the sore loser law to partisan petitioning candidates. If a candidate petitions to be the Libertarian Party candidate for some office, but the party does not nominate him, then he can not run as an independent or write-in candidate; the same disability that a failed candidate in the Democratic or Republican primary is under.
Article V, sec. 7, Ohio Constitution: “All nominations for elective state, district, county and municipal offices shall be made at direct primary elections or by petition as provided by law.”
My emphasis added.
How do you think newly-qualifying parties nominate in Ohio? In reality, they nominate by convention because they aren’t given a primary.
Do you think the Ohio legislature could pass an ordinary bill, letting the Democratic and Republican Parties nominate by convention, if they wish?
The Women’s Equality Party and Reform Party in New York did not hold a convention.
But the Libertarian Party might be organized to hold a convention. I don’t know whether they have any local organizations that could hold regional conventions.
According to the new Ohio statute it is the sponsors listed on the party-qualification petition that actually authorize placement of party nominees on the general election ballot.
They could exercise that authority independently or in concert with conventions. For example:
An early convention could designate party candidates. When these party candidates filed their individual nominating petition, the sponsors would them to appear on the party ballot.
Or there could be a later convention, which would then decide whether the sponsors should authorize any candidates who had filed a nominating petition. This is somewhat similar to the system used in Texas.
Or the sponsors could simply independently choose which candidates who file nominating petitions.
I assume the LPO has bylaws that state who the sponsors on the qualifying petition will be. If not, they should. They might not win their lawsuit.