On June 3, the Michigan Supreme Court declined to accept the ballot access case brought by two Republican candidates for Governor. The candidates had been required to submit 15,000 signatures to get on the primary ballot, but their petitions were clearly permeated with forged signatures. The State Court of Appeals had declined on June 1 to give them any relief. Thanks to Thomas Jones for this news.
On June 3, the People’s Party of Florida filed a federal lawsuit against the Florida law that won’t let a party nominate someone who hasn’t been a member for a year before filing. The People’s Party became ballot-qualified in Florida less than a year ago, so the law prohibits the party from having any candidates whatsoever in its first year on the ballot. No one was able to be registered in the People’s Party before it became ballot-qualified.
The candidate-plaintiff wishes to be the People’s Party nominee for Pasco County Board of County Commissioners. People’s Party of Florida v Florida Department of State, m.d., 8:22cv-1274.
The only two other states that ever blocked a new party from running any candidates in its first year of qualified existence were Nevada and Oklahoma, but the laws of both those states, as applied to new parties, were struck down long ago. The Independent American Party of Nevada won its case in the State Supreme Court in 1975, and the Libertarian Party of Oklahoma won its case in U.S. District Court in 1980. Here is the People’s Party complaint. The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Thomas P. Barber.
On June 1, the Michigan State Court of Appeals issued an opinion in Johnson v Board of State Canvassers, 361564. It upholds the administrative ruling that blocked a leading Republican candidate for Governor from the August primary ballot. Here is the 12-page opinion. The State Supreme Court will review this decision very soon. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.
On June 3, David Ritter sent this letter to the U.S. Supreme Court, in response to the June 2 opinion of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court that said postal ballots in which the voter forgot to date the signature on the outer envelope should be counted. Ritter is the 2021 candidate for local office whose close election triggered the lawsuit. His letter belittles the Commonwealth Court Opinion and again urges the U.S. Supreme Court to disallow such ballots.
On June 2, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled that postal ballots in which the voter forgot to add the date next to the signature on the outer envelope should be counted. McCormick for U.S. Senate v Chapman, 286 MD 2022. The Commonwealth Court relied on both the state constitution and state election law precedents, and also on the “materiality” portion of the federal voting rights Act.
The decision was then sent to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is pondering the issue in a related case dating from a 2021 election. One can read the decision using this link, which is the message to the U.S. Supreme Court.
