League of Women Voters Files Federal Lawsuit to Postpone New York Primaries for Statewide Office

Currently New York expects to hold primaries on June 28 for statewide office, assembly, and local office; and another primary on August 23 for U.S. House and State Senate. New York election officials consider candidate filing for the primaries for statewide office, assembly and local office to be closed. New York election officials also expect statewide independent candidates, and the nominees of unqualified parties, to file 45,000 signatures by May 31.

On May 18, the New York State League of Women Voters filed a federal lawsuit, LWV of NY State v Kosinski, s.d., 1:22cv-4084. The League, and two voters, argue that any candidates already qualified for the primary, for statewide office, needed 100 signatures from each of half the U.S. House districts, but all such primary petitions, having already been circulated and submitted, cannot possibly be in compliance with the law. That is because such petitions would have used the old U.S. House districts that were invalidated earlier this month by New York’s highest state court.

Therefore, the Complaint argues, it is necessary to re-open the primary petitioning for statewide office, so that the petitions can be circulated using the new districts, which will formally be made public on May 20. Therefore, the Complaint further argues, it is necessary to postpone the primary for statewide office from June 28 to August 23, the date of the U.S. House and State Senate primaries.

The Complaint points out the obvious inconsistency in the state’s position…New York primary statewide petitions can use the old, invalid districts to satisfy the distribution requirement; but the state expects the independent petitions to use the new districts, which is extremely burdensome, since that allows only eleven days between the creation of the new districts, and the independent candidate petition deadline.

The voters in this new lawsuit say they want the primary filing opened so that new candidates can run in the primaries for Governor. Although no plaintiff is an independent candidate, or a supporter of an independent candidate, this lawsuit is very helpful to independent candidates. The Complaint says the independent petitions should be due on June 20, not May 31. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the news about the lawsuit.

Robby Starbuck Newsom Voluntarily Dismisses His Case Against Tennessee Republican Party

On May 18, Robby Starbuck Newsom voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit to get on the Tennessee Republican primary ballot for Congress. Newsom v Golden, m.d., 3:22cv-318. The Republican Party of Tennessee had passed a rule saying no one could run for congress who had not voted in three of the last four Tennessee Republican primaries. Newsom could not comply with this because he hadn’t been living in Tennessee that long. Therefore, the party rule functioned as a duration of residency requirement.

The U.S. District Court had denied him injunctive relief, but the declaratory judgment part of the case was still alive. However, Newsom apparently didn’t wish to continue the case to settle the issue.

Idaho Holds Libertarian Primary for First Time Since 2002

On May 17, Idaho held primaries for the four ballot-qualified parties, Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, and Constitution. This was the first time Idaho had held a Libertarian primary since 2002. When there are no contests in a party’s primary, the state doesn’t print up primary ballots for that party, and everyone who filed for the primary is deemed nominated.

Here is a link to the Secretary of State’s website, showing unofficial 2022 primary results. Somewhat more than 700 voters used a Libertarian primary ballot. Back in 2002, there were 1,179 voters who chose a Libertarian primary ballot, but back then, Idaho didn’t have registration by party and any voter was free to choose any party’s primary ballot.

Somewhat more than 516 voters in 2022 used a Constitution primary ballot.

Los Angeles Times Associate Editor Writes on California’s Top-Two System

Nicholas Goldberg, an associate editor of the Los Angeles Times, has this analysis of California’s top-two system. The piece quotes three political scientists. Two of them believe it has been beneficial, and one of them does not. Ironically, all three of these political scientists expressed these opinions twelve years ago when the system was passed by the voters.

The article is balanced, but fails to mention the biggest impact that the California and Washington top-two systems has produced: a complete elimination of minor party candidates on the general election ballot, except in races in which one of the major parties doesn’t run anyone. Thanks to Eric Wong for the link. The piece has been published in many newspapers besides just the Los Angeles Times.

Kansas Supreme Court Says U.S. House District Boundaries Don’t Violate State Constitution

On May 18, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a two-page opinion, reversing the lower state court and upholding the U.S. House districts passed by the legislature earlier this year. The lower court had said the maps represent a partisan gerrymander which is prohibited by the Kansas Constitution. The State Supreme Court did not explain its reasoning, but says it will do that later. It is unclear if the decision was unanimous. Rivera v Schwab, case number 125092.