On January 20, the voters opposed to the current Georgia U.S. House redistricting plan filed this brief in Pendergrass v Raffensperger, n.d., 1:21cv-5339. The brief fiercely attacks the state for suggesting that it is already too late to change the U.S. House boundaries. As the brief mentions on page 20, Governor Brian Kemp did not act on the redistricting bill for more than an entire month after he received it from the legislature. Of course, it was impossible for anyone to sue over the districting plan until after he had signed it into law.

This case has implications for Georgia ballot access in 2022 for U.S. House. Under a federal precedent from Georgia in 2002, when the redistricting is uncertain after the petitioning period for independent and minor party candidates has started, the petition requirement must be reduced. Parker v Barnes. The petitioning period in Georgia started January 13, and ends July 12.

Also, the Secretary of State still has not calculated how many signatures are needed in each district. The calculation is time-consuming, because the new boundaries must be imposed on voter registration data from October 2020. The Secretary of State probably doesn’t want to do the work until the actual 2022 districts are settled.

On January 22, the Wyoming Republican Party state central committee met and chose three nominees to fill the vacancy in the office of the state’s Superintendent of Public Instruction. Because the Republican Party nominee for that office had been elected in 2018, and because that office is now vacant due to a resignation, state law says the Republican Party may choose three replacement nominees. Then, the Governor chooses one of them.

The party is being threatened with a lawsuit because it chose its three nominees under a system in which each county party had three votes, despite extreme population disparities between counties. See this story.

On January 24, the Michigan Supreme Court struck down a 2018 law that makes it more difficult to get statewide initiatives on the ballot. The law said that no more than 15% of the signatures submitted could come from a single U.S. House district. This meant that once a certain number of voters from a particular district had signed the petition, any more signatures from voters in that district were not valid. This type of restriction, for either initiatives, minor parties, or independent candidates, is quite unusual.

The law had also been struck down the by Michigan State Appeals Court on October 29, 2021.

The decision is not yet on the State Supreme Court’s website, but it will be in a few days, and at that time a link to the opinion will be added to this post. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the news. UPDATE: here is the decision.