Alaska State Appeals Court Will Hear Case over Prosecution of Persons Born in American Samoa for Registering to Vote

Posted on by January 14, 2026
8

On January 15, the Alaska State Appeals Court will hear Tupe Smith v State of Alaska, A-14529.  This is the lawsuit over the prosecution of some persons born in American Samoa, who now live in Alaska.  They are being prosecuted for registering to vote.  The lead defendant, Tupe Smith, was elected to the School Board in Whittier, Alaska. yet she is being threatened with ten years in prison.  Persons born in American Samoa are “U.S. Nationals”, not U.S. citizens.

Here is her brief.  Her defense is that she lacked intent to break any law.  Election-related forms in Alaska, as in other states, don’t have a checkbox category for “U.S. Nationals”.

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Opinion in Bost v Illinois That May Be Helpful to Minor Party and Independent Candidates

Posted on by January 14, 2026
6

On January 14, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Bost v Illinois State Board of Elections, 24-568.  The opinion, by Chief Justice John Roberts, says that candidates have standing to challenge election laws even if it is not likely that the candidate is harmed in any concrete way by the challenged law.  The opinion for the Court is only ten pages.  Two justices dissented and two other justices signed the opinion but said they would have limited the holding.

The plaintiff, Illinois Congressmember Michael J. Bost, challenged the Illinois law that allowed postal ballots to count if they arrive within two weeks of election day.  Congressman Bost always wins overwhelmingly.  The lower courts said he didn’t have standing because he couldn’t show that the law injured him.  But the U.S. Supreme Court majority report says candidates have automatic standing to challenge election laws governing counting of votes.

It says, “A candidate has a personal stake in the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election…Candidates have an interest in a fair process…the long-shot and shoo-in alike…whether these decisions help, hurt, or have no effect on a candidate’s electoral prospects, they deprive the candidate of a fair process and an accurate result.”

Page five says “The counting of unlawful votes – or discarding of lawful ones – erodes public confidence that the election results reflect the people’s will.”

The Bost decision should make it easier for declared write-in candidates to challenge failure to tally their votes.  Jurisdictions that won’t tally write-in votes, even for candidates who filed a write-in declaration of candidacy, are Alaska, the District of Columbia, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, Virginia, and Washington.

The Bost decision should also make it easier for candidates to challenge campaign finance laws that let contributors give more money to the nominees of qualified parties than to other candidates for the same office.  Although the Bost opinion only deals with counting votes, the philosophy behind the decision supports the concept that the Second Circuit was wrong when it said the Upstate Jobs Party didn’t have standing to challenge a New York law that let people give higher contributions to the nominees of qualified parties.  And it similarly suggests that the Eleventh Circuit was wrong when it said the Georgia Libertarian Party didn’t have standing to challenge a similar Georgia campaign finance law.

Sooner State Party Hopes to Qualify for Oklahoma Ballot

Posted on by January 14, 2026
4

The Sooner State Party, a party organized in just the state of Oklahoma, is hoping to qualify for party status this year.  It needs 34,599 valid signatures by February 28.  If it qualifies, it will be the first time that any third party that is not nationally organized will have been on the Oklahoma ballot.

The only other ballot-qualified third parties in Oklahoma history (since statehood in 1907) have been Prohibition, Socialist, Progressive, Farmer-Labor, American, Libertarian, Reform, and Americans Elect.  Also the New Alliance Party in 1988 had presidential ballot status but not ballot access for other offices.

Third parties that were qualified in many states, but never qualified in Oklahoma, in the last fifty years, have been Constitution, Green, Natural Law, and No Labels.  The reason Oklahoma has had so few minor parties has been its severe ballot access laws.

The Sooner State Party is centrist.  Here is a news story about the party.  Thanks to Independent Political Report for the link.

If the party fails to obtain enough valid signatures by the February 28 deadline, it is possible it could win a lawsuit against the early petition deadline.  Oklahoma is in the Tenth Circuit.  The Tenth Circuit said in 1988 in Rainbow Coalition v Oklahoma State Election Board that the old May 31 petition deadline is constitutional.  However, the Tenth Circuit also suggested in Populist Party v Herschler, another 1988 case, that the Wyoming petition deadline of June 1 is likely unconstitutional.  Oklahoma would defend its February 28 deadline by saying that the deadline is needed to give new parties their own primary.  However, courts have said in decisions from Arkansas, Ohio, Tennessee, Nebraska, South Dakota, Idaho, and Nevada that early deadlines for new parties cannot be justified by any so-called state interest in putting new parties in primaries.  Instead the states can provide that new parties nominate by convention, thus eliminating the need for an early petition deadline.

Alaskan Independence Party Votes to Dissolve Itself

Posted on by January 15, 2026
1

On December 7, the state leaders of the Alaskan Independence Party voted to disband the party.  Here is the story from the Anchorage Daily News.

It is not clear that the Alaska elections office will let the party remove itself from the ballot.  Some states have interpreted their laws to mean that parties can’t dissolve themselves unless the law specifically authorized such action. After the experiences with Americans Elect in 2012 and No Labels in 2024, some states amended their laws to authorize parties to dissolve themselves.  UPDATE:  the state will let the party remove itself from the ballot.

Thanks to Scott Kohlhaas for letting us know.