On April 28, the Minnesota Libertarian Party filed this reply brief in its ballot access case, Libertarian Party of Minnesota v Simon, 0:19cv-2312.  This case was filed in 2019 and is not concerned with the health crisis.  It attacks the Minnesota law that restricts independent petitions (and petitions for the nominees of unqualified parties) to a collection period of only 14 days.  However, if the petition is for president, the petition period is 92 days.

The lawsuit also attacks the law that says the petition signers must say, by their signature, that they do not intend to vote in the upcoming primary for the same office.

On May 4, initiative proponents filed this reply brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Schmitt v LaRose, 19-974.  This is the case over whether it violates the First Amendment for local election administrators to reject an initiative petition, even though it has enough valid signatures, if the administrators think the initiative, if passed, would be illegal or unconstitutional. The Sixth Circuit had ruled against the initiative proponents.  This is an Ohio case involving an initiative relating to marijuana.

On May 4, the Colorado Supreme Court, in an unsigned, short opinion, reversed the trial court and said candidates can’t be on the primary ballot this year unless they obtain the signatures required by the election code.  The opinion says the Court can’t do anything for the plaintiff candidate because it doesn’t have the power, and that only the legislature can help.  Griswold v Ferrigno Warren, 2020SA34.  Here is the opinion.

The effect of the decision is to remove both Michelle Warren and Lorena Garcia from the U.S. Senate primary ballot for the Democratic Party.  The only two candidates who will be on that ballot did not collect any signatures; they got on by showing substantial support at a state party meeting.