Eleven Texas Democratic State Senators Introduce a Bill to Repeal Ban on Voting in Primary and Signing for a New Party or Independent Candidate

Posted on by August 10, 2021
12

On August 9, eleven Democratic State Senators introduced a bill to repeal the Texas “primary screenout” law. That law prohibits voters from signing a petition for a new party or an independent candidate, if the voter had voted in a primary that year. The bill, SB 58, is sponsored by Sarah Eckhardt, Carol Alvarado, Cesar Blanco, Roland Gutierrez, Juan Hinojosa, Nathan Johnson, Eddie Lucio, Jose Menendez, Beverly Powell, John Whitmire, and Judith Zaffirini. Thanks to Art DiBianca for this news.

Mayor of Buffalo, New York, Seeks Re-Election as a Write-in Candidate, Despite Losing Democratic Primary

Posted on by August 10, 2021
1

Mayor Byron Brown, of Buffalo, New York, is actively raising money for his re-election, even though he lost the June 2021 Democratic primary. He is running in November as a write-in candidate. See this story. The winner of the Democratic primary, India Walton, will be the only name on the November ballot.

Florida Won’t Appeal U.S. District Court Decision that Struck Down Limits on Contributions to Initiatives

Posted on by August 10, 2021
Reply

Florida’s Attorney General has announced that the state will not appeal the U.S. District Court decision in ACLU of Florida v Lee, n.d., 4:21cv-190. That decision enjoined the new law that made it illegal for anyone to contribute more than $3,000 to a campaign for a statewide initiative. Thanks to the Free Speech Institute for this news.

Fifth Circuit Sets Oral Argument Date in Lawsuit Involving Ex-Felon Voting Rights

Posted on by August 9, 2021
18

All the full-time judges of the Fifth Circuit will hear Harness v Hosemann, 19-60632, on September 22, 2021. This is the case challenging Mississippi’s ban on ex-felon voting. The original panel had upheld the law, but then the entire set of full-time judges in the Fifth Circuit had decided to rehear the case. Bans on ex-felon disenfranchisement are unconstitutional if the evidence shows that the ban was motivated by a desire to injure a particular racial or ethnic minority.

Democratic Party Lawsuit Against Arizona’s Ballot Order Law Delayed Because Legislature Eliminates Secretary of State’s Ability to Defend Laws in Court

Posted on by August 9, 2021
18

Last month, the Ninth Circuit had tentatively scheduled a November 2021 oral argument date in Mecinas v Hobbs, 20-16301. This is the case in which the Democratic Party challenges the Arizona law on the order of candidates on general election ballots. The U.S. District Court had upheld the law, which says that the party that won the gubernatorial election in any particular county enjoys having its nominees on the top line on the ballot.

In 2020, the Democratic Party had sued six states over the order of candidates, but this is the only surviving case. The party lost the others.

However, the Secretary of State of Arizona recently asked the Ninth Circuit for a delay in the proceedings, because on June 30, 2021, SB 1823 was signed into law. It says the Attorney General cannot represent the Secretary of State in court until 2023. It also forbids the Secretary of State from hiring an outside attorney. The bill says the Secretary of State can hire one in-house attorney, but the bill grants no funding to pay for that. So, the Secretary of State says the ballot order case must be delayed for two months until she can decide how to defend the state law.

The bill seems to have been motivated by partisan politics. The Secretary of State is a Democrat and the legislature has a Republican majority. See this story.