Several Illinois news stories have recently pointed out the large share of state legislative elections with only one candidate running. The paucity of candidates is due to the restrictive Illinois ballot access laws, both in the general election and also, to a lesser extent, in primary elections.

Here is an article from Capitol Fax.

There is also a front-page story in the March 21 issue of the Journal Register, the Springfield daily newspaper, but it is behind a pay wall. It is titled, “One in Five Voters May not have a Say in Some Races.” Thanks to Sam Cahnman for this news.

On March 21, U.S. District Court Judge David J. Novak, a Trump appointee, held a status conference in Goldman v Northam, e.d., 3:21cv-420. This is the case on whether Virginia must hold elections this year for lower house of the state legislature. The last election for that office was in November 2021, and the state used districts based on the 2010 census. The plaintiff argues that it violates one-person, one-vote to allow members of the lower house to remain in office til January 2024, when they were elected in districts based on the 2010 census.

The judge ordered another round of briefs, to be confined to whether the plaintiff, a voter, has standing. All new briefs will be filed by April 21. This news story says that the judge orally scolded the state for having caused the case (which was filed last year) to move so slowly.

On March 21, the Alabama Libertarian Party asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its case over access to the list of registered voters. Alabama gives a list of the registered voters free to the qualified parties, but it charges $36,000 for an unqualified party, even if that unqualified party is petitioning and obviously needs the list to help it check the validity of its petition.

In 1970, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed a judgment of a 3-judge U.S. District Court in New York, that if the state gives a free list of the registered voters to the qualified parties, it must give it to unqualified parties who are petitioning. Despite that, and precedents from lower courts outside Alabama that agreed with that principle, the federal courts in Alabama refused to follow the precedent and ruled against the Libertarian Party. Here is the cert petition. The case number hasn’t been assigned yet (the number on the filing is not the case number).