on June 17, the U.S. Supreme Court asked Ohio to respond to the appeal for ballot access relief in Thompson v Dewine, 19A-1054. This is the case over ballot access relief for Ohio initiatives. The U.S. District Court had granted relief, but then the Sixth Circuit had reversed that. The state’s response is due Monday, June 22.
On June 16, the Sixth Circuit refused to rehear Thompson v Dewine, 20-3526. This is the case in which a U.S. District Court in Ohio had ordered ballot access relief for proponents of an Ohio initiative, but then the Sixth Circuit had reversed, and said because Ohio’s lock-down had included an exception for “First Amendment activities”, therefore the initiative proponents were free to be circulating, and the state could not be blamed for their difficulties caused by the health crisis.
The proponents had already asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule the Sixth Circuit, even before the Sixth Circuit had made a decision about rehearing. Now that the Sixth Circuit has refused to rethink the case, it is now docketed in the U.S. Supreme Court, 19A1054.
This is the first ballot access case related to the health crisis that has been presented to the U.S. Supreme Court.
On June 8, the Illinois State Board of Elections asked the Seventh Circuit to reverse all the ballot access relief granted to minor party and independent candidates back on April 23. The State Board even wants to remove the statewide nominees of the Libertarian and Green Parties, even though they agreed to this in April. In the Seventh Circuit, the case is 20-1961.
Ordinarily an appeal must be filed within 30 days, but the state was able to delay its decision to appeal, because in the interim period, the State had asked for a modification of the April 23 relief. That extended the deadline for the state to appeal. Although the U.S. District Court Judge mostly refused to revise her earlier ruling, she did move the new petition deadline from August 7 to July 20. But that didn’t satisfy the state, and now it wants all relief reversed.
Here is the June 15 brief of the minor party and independent candidates, opposing any change by the Seventh Circuit.
UPDATE: here is the June 15 brief of Kyle Kopitke, independent presidential candidate who has intervened in the case on the side of the plaintiffs.
U.S. District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr., will hear Libertarian Party of Virginia v Virginia State Board of Elections, e.d., 3:20cv-349, on Friday, June 19. This is the lawsuit filed by the Libertarian, Green, Constitution, and Independent Green Parties for ballot access relief due to the health crisis.
On June 16, the state filed this brief, arguing that the plaintiffs are not entitled to relief.
Josh Putnam, who runs the FrontloadingHQ blog about presidential primaries, has this article at 538.com. He discusses the idea that if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that presidential electors are free to vote for any qualified candidate, that “chaos” would insue. Putnam says that is a groundless fear. He points out that in the states in which there were “disobedient” elections in 2016, the major parties had a decentralized system for choosing presidential elector nominees, but that the major parties are free to centralize their method. He says that the Washington state Democratic Party has already done so.
A decision will be out soon from the U.S. Supreme Court about presidential elector freedom of choice. Thanks to Fairvote for the link.
