Wisconsin is holding its judicial non-partisan elections on April 7, along with Democratic and Republican presidential primaries. On April 4 the Republican National Committee asked the U.S. Supreme Court to disallow a ruling of the lower federal courts, permitting absentee mail ballots to count if they arrive in election administration offices by April 13. The Republican National Committee wants all such ballots to be invalidated unless they have a postmark of April 7 or earlier. Here is the filing. Republican National Committee v Democratic National Committee, 19A1016.

UPDATE: the Democratic response is here.

UPDATE: here is the Republican reply brief.

On March 31, an independent candidate for U.S. House in Oklahoma, Stephen Christopher Wright, filed a federal lawsuit against the Oklahoma petition in lieu of filing fee. He argues that it is impossible to collect the needed signatures. Although Oklahoma would let him on the ballot without a petition if he paid the filing fee, he argues that he cannot afford the fee. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled twice that candidates who cannot pay the filing fee must have some alternative means for getting on the ballot.

Here is the Complaint in Wright v State, w.d., 5:20cv-287. He has already been permitted to file the lawsuit without paying the court filing fee; the magistrate agrees that he is a pauper.

His Complaint is legally deficient because he only sued the “State of Oklahoma”. Under the Eleventh Amendment, a lawsuit like this must sue individual state officers, not the state itself. But it will be easy at this point for him to amend his Complaint to also sue the Secretary of the State Election Board, or perhaps the members of the State Board, or perhaps the Governor. Any one of those defendants would be sufficient. Thanks to Chris Powell for news about this lawsuit.

Here is the court filing before the Arizona Supreme Court in Arizonans for Second Chances v Hobbs, filed April 1, 2020. This is the lawsuit that says since Arizona already permits electronic signatures for candidate petitions, there is no state interest in refusing to let initiative petitions be gathered the same way.

On April 2, some other Arizona initiative proponents filed a similar case in U.S. District Court, Arizonans for Fair Elections v Hobbs, 2:20cv-658. Here is the Complaint. Thanks to Pat Quinn for the links.