On February 1, the Texas Supreme Court stayed a ruling of a trial court that would have removed a Republican candidate from the March 1 primary ballot. Rachel Leal-Hudson needed 250 signatures. She submitted 530 and there were enough valid. However, her primary opponent sued to remove her on the grounds that ten signatures had been witnessed by the candidate’s husband, and yet the candidate had signed the petition form indicating she had been the witness. The trial court removed her from the ballot, but the Texas Supreme Court disagreed and kept her on the ballot. See this story.
On February 19, the Alabama Republican Party barred three legislative candidates from its May 24 primary. Alabama case law allows parties to bar candidates from running in its primary for reasons having to do with political stances and association.
Tripp Powell was barred from running for State Senate because in 2018, he donated $500 to the Democratic nominee for Governor.
Anson Knowles was barred from running for State House because at some time in the past, he was chair of the Libertarian Party of his county.
It is not known why the Republican Party barred Teresa Rhea from running. See this story.
California Assemblymember Patrick O’Donnell (D-Long Beach) has introduced AB 2808. It makes the use of ranked choice voting illegal, even for charter cities and charter counties. Here is the text of the bill. Section One sets forth statements criticizing ranked choice voting and denying that is has any benefits.
O’Donnell has been in the legislature since 2014. He has not previously authored election law bills, and he is not a member of the Assembly Elections Committee.
As previously noted, on February 17, a U.S. District Court in Arkansas ruled against the NAACP in a racial gerrymander case, on the grounds that only the federal government can sue states over voting rights, under Section Two of the Voting Rights Act. Ian Millhiser, a journalist who specializes in legal matters, here writes clearly why the Arkansas judge is mistaken.
On February 18, some Ohio voters filed a federal lawsuit, asking the federal court to take the responsibility for choosing a redistricting plan for legislative seats. The Ohio Redistricting Commission plans have twice been rejected by the State Supreme Court. The State Supreme Court asked the Commission to try again. But the Commission cannot reach agreement, so there is no new plan. The federal plaintiffs want the federal court to order the state to use the Commission’s second plan. Gonidakis v Ohio Redistricting Commission, s.d., 2:22cv-773. Here is the Complaint, which asks for a three-judge court.