On December 16, the Ninth Circuit said that the five federal cases over the California tax returns-ballot access law are moot. The Ninth Circuit order in all these combined cases says, “Because these appeals were mooted by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Patterson v Padilla, and not through any voluntary actions of the parties, we remand these matters to the district court with instruction to vacate the October 2, 2019 order.”

This means that the U.S. District Court order, finding that the California law keeping presidential primary candidates off ballots unless they reveal their income tax returns violates the U.S. Constitution, can’t be used as a precedent in future litigation. Here is the three-page order.

On December 16, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton, a Clinton appointee, refused to block a 2014 Arizona law that makes it more difficult for statewide initiatives to get on the ballot. The law says that after an initiative is submitted, if anyone challenges the sufficiency of that petition, any paid circulator or any out-of-state circulator who worked on the petition must appear in court to answer questions about their work. If they do not appear, then all the signatures they collected are deemed invalid.

The case against the law is still alive, but while the case continues, the law will be in effect. Here is the decision in Miracle v Hobbs, 2:19cv-4694. The restriction does not apply to petitions for candidates or new parties.

On December 17, the Minnesota Supreme Court expedited the lawsuit De La Fuente v Simon, A19-1994. This is Rocky De La Fuente’s challenge to the Minnesota presidential primary ballot access law, which says that no candidate can get on a presidential primary unless that party approves of the person.

The Court ordered the Secretary of State to respond by December 31. If the Republican Party, or perhaps the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, wishes to express anything, they are invited to submit amicus briefs, also by December 31. The oral argument will be January 9, 2020, at 10 a.m.

The Minnesota Supreme Court has an excellent record on ballot access. In 2004 it unanimously invalidated a law that kept qualified parties from having any nominees on the general election ballot unless they had a high turnout in their primary. Also in 2004 it unanimously put a candidate for congress on the primary ballot, even though he was a fugitive living in Italy. But he met the constitutional qualifications to be a member of Congress, so because he had paid his filing fee, he could not be kept off the ballot.