On August 7, a Montana state trial court removed the Green Party from the ballot. Montana Democratic Party v State, DDV-2020-856. The law requires 5,000 signatures, but also requires an unequal distribution requirement from one-third of the state legislative districts. Some districts need as many as 150 signatures, but others require as few as 55 signatures. Over 13,000 people had signed the petition to put the Green Party on the 2020 ballot, and only 562 signers then withdrew their names. So the petition still would have had far more signatures than necessary, except that the withdrawn signatures were from certain legislative districts, so the petition failed the distribution requirement.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down unequal distribution requirements for statewide petitions in 1969 in Moore v Ogilvie, and since then lower courts have invalidated them in ten states.
The reason any signers withdrew their names is that the Democratic Party contacted them and asked them to remove their names. There is no state law in Montana that authorizes signers to remove their names from a petition for a new party. Furthermore, the state had already held a Green Party primary on June 2, 2020. But because the law does explicitly permit signers to remove their names from initiative petitions, the judge felt that the guiding principle is that signers can withdraw their names from any petition.
This is the second election in a row in which the Montana Green Party petition was first accepted, and a primary was held, and then afterwards the state courts removed the party from the ballot. The Republican Party had arranged for the paid petitioners for both party petitions. The Green Party did not really want to be a qualified party in 2020 (although it did in 2018), but it did want to petition for president. However, the presidential petition, which requires 5,000 signatures with no distribution requirement, is due August 12, and there is no time to do it.
The Montana Green Party has a federal case pending in the Ninth Circuit against the unequal distribution requirement, but it will not be resolved in time for the 2020 election. That case is Montana Green Party v Stapleton, 20-35340.
The Secretary of State, who is a Republican, will probably appeal the decision to the Montana Supreme Court. However, in 2018, the Montana Supreme Court removed the Green Party, so it is not likely that the Secretary of State will win his appeal.
The August 7, 2020 decision says the Democratic Party has standing because the party “would be harmed electorally because voters who might otherwise vote for the Democratic Party candidates might vote instead for Green Party candidates.”
“would be harmed electorally because voters who might otherwise vote for the Democratic Party candidates might vote instead for Green Party candidates”
I’m almost lost for words, the fact that any official ruling says this is absolutely outrageous. So screw the people having a choice, they might ‘steal’ votes from one of the two major parties! Republicans might try to limit who can actually vote, but I have long been convinced that it’s the Democratic Party who are the most draconian when it comes to ballot access. This is goddamn disgusting. But hey, who ever said the Democratic Party liked democracy?
James- One has to remember that ALL votes belong to the Democrats and Republicans. Any attempt to deprive them of THEIR votes is misguided and just plain wrong.
Wouldn’t this same logic apply to removing the republican party from the ballot? Democrats may be harmed if people vote for republicans. They could even lose elections. So it’s a wonder Montana judges are allowing republicans to continue to appear on the ballot.
Maybe that’s just until someone thinks of making that case in court?
MT- one more STONE AGE small State oligarchy regime
— created by post Civil War Elephants to try to have ELEPHANT PERMANENT CONTROL of the minority rule gerrymander USA Senate.
One more party HACK ***judge*** at work — akin to 1930s Stalin/Hitler *judges*.
—
PR and AppV
TOTSOP
Would someone have to register as a democrat in Montana to have standing to bring a lawsuit to remove the republican party from the ballot based on this precedent since clearly having republicans listed on the ballot hurts the chances of democrats winning?
Montana does not have registration by party.
Even better.
This is the kind of shit as to why more and more people are realizing this country is an absolute shithole. We are NOT a democracy, we’re NOT a republic, we’re an elitist corporatist oligarchy/plutocracy. There is no more free and fair elections (granted there hasn’t been for quite a while now), and the general public is too fucking deaf, blind and stupid to realize what bullshit they’re being fed. This country is effectively dead. We’ll be an explicit fascist empire before long.
“We’ll be an explicit fascist empire before long.” – Andrew
OR… we’ll be a socialist/Marxist/Stalinist mess. Either way, we’re screwed!
Very advanced ROT since post WW II P=U-N-K Prezs since 1993
Clinton
Bush II
Obama
Trump.
Robot Party Puppet Hacks as USA H Rep Speakers and USA Sen *Leaders*.
Worse in States.
—–
PR and AppV – pending Condorcet.
TOTSOP
“The Democratic Party has standing because the party “would be harmed electorally because voters who might otherwise vote for the Democratic Party candidates might vote instead for Green Party candidates.”? Really? That’s absurd. Why don’t they just sue the Republics as well. After all, the Demcrats would be harmed electorally because voters who might otherwise vote for the Democratic Party candidates might vote instead for Republican Party candidates.
That’s exactly what I was saying. And since they don’t have party registration you don’t even have to register as a democrat to have standing.
Shouldn’t the democrats update their name to totalitarian party now?