On September 3, three California voters submitted an amicus brief in Clark v Weber, 21-55930, the case in which opponents of the gubernatorial recall argue that the recall provisions violate the U.S. Constitution. The three California voters are represented by Attorney Harmeet Dhillon, a member of the Republican National Committee. The amicus supports the constitutionality of the recall, and also suggests that the Secretary of State won’t do a good job of defending the recall in court.

The Ninth Circuit has not yet ruled on whether the amicus can be accepted. On September 4, the voters who filed the lawsuit against the recall filedl a brief, arguing that the Republican amicus should not be accepted.

On September 3, U.S. District Court Judge Leigh Martin May finalized interim petition relief for Georgia district and partisan county offices for 2022. She reiterated her original plan to require petitions of 1% of the number of registered voters, plus the filing fee. That will be severe for U.S. House; a candidate will need approximately 5,150 signatures. Cowen v Raffensperger, n.d., 1:17cv-4660. She still seems to be applying the order to legislative and county races as well as U.S. House races.

On September 3, the Alaska Supreme Court unanimously struck down a state law limiting payment to initiative petitioners to only $1 per signature. The decision is unanimous. Resource Development Council for Alaska v State of Alaska, S-17834. Here is the 32-page opinion. Thanks to Ken Jacobus for the news.