Five of Alabama’s six Republican U.S. House members have filed this amicus brief in Merrill v Milligan, 21A375. That is the lawsuit over whether Alabama U.S. House districts should be redrawn to include two districts with African-American majorities. Congressman Mo Brooks did not sign the brief, apparently because he is not running for re-election. Instead he is running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.
Eight Vermont State Senators have introduced SB 229, which would provide for ranked choice voting for primaries and general elections, for president and congress. The sponsors include six Democrats and two Progressives. The Vermont Senate has 30 members.
On January 28, Texas filed this brief in Bilyeu v Esparza, w.d., 1:21cv-1089. This is the Libertarian Party challenge to the law that requires candidates seeing a nomination at a convention to have already paid a filing fee.
On January 31, fourteen states filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Merrill v Milligan, the Alabama U.S. House redistricting lawsuit. Louisiana officials wrote the brief, which was then also signed by Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. All those states have Attorneys General who are Republicans. The brief is on the side of Alabama.
The main point of the amicus is that it is too late to redraw the Alabama districts. The brief admits that the lawsuit against the Alabama districts was filed on November 4, 2021, the very day the new Alabama districts were finalized. The brief complains about the difficulty for Alabama to redraw its districts given that the primary is May 24. But the brief does not acknowledge that Alabama could postpone its 2022 primary. In 2020 many states postponed primaries. Alabama congressional primaries were in June from 1986 through 2010. In 1980 they were in September.
On January 31, Congressman Madison Cawthorn filed a federal lawsuit against the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Cawthorn v Circosta, e.d., 5:22cv-50. The lawsuit seeks to stop the State Board from determining whether or not he is eligible for Congress. A challenge is pending against him based on the Fourteenth Amemdment, section 3, which says that members of Congress who had taken an oath to support the Constitution, and who then engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution, are ineligible to remain in Congress.
Here is the brief, which argues that only Congress can judge the qualifications of its members. Thanks to Political Wire for the news.
