Washington, D.C., City Council Passes Bill Lowering Number of Signatures for Some Offices

Posted on by May 5, 2020
10

On May 5, the Washington, D.C., city council passed B23-0751.  It makes many changes to laws of all kinds, relating to the health crisis.  Section 23 of the bill lowers the number of signatures needed for a petition to place a candidate for Delegate to the U.S. House, or city-council-at-large, on the November ballot, from 3,000 signatures to 250 signatures.

The bill lowers the general election petition for city council from a ward from 500 signatures to 150 signatures.

The bill also says blank candidate petitions, and initiative petitions, can now be sent to potential signers electronically.  Potential signers must then print the blank petition on their home printer.  They may sign the printed paper, and e-mail the signature with a scan back to the campaign office that is collecting the signatures.  Or, of course, they can also postally mail the sheet back.  The bill also eliminates the requirement that petitions be on legal size paper.  They can now be on standard 8.5 inch by eleven inch paper.

Oddly, the bill does not seem to lower the number of signatures for independent presidential candidates, or the presidential nominees of unqualified parties.

Initiative Proponents File Final Brief in U.S. Supreme Court

Posted on by May 5, 2020
1

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.

Colorado Supreme Court Removes Candidates from Democratic Primary Ballot

Posted on by May 4, 2020
4

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.