On November 21, an amicus curiae brief was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court in De La Fuente v Padilla, 19-524. This is the case over California’s independent presidential petition, which requires almost 200,000 signatures to be collected in 105 days. The Ninth Circuit had upheld the law. Here is the brief. COFOE (the Coalition for Free & Open Elections) paid the printing bill. COFOE appreciates all the contributions that have made this possible.
On November 22, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York criticized leaders of the New York Democratic Party who are working to toughen the definition of a qualified party. See this story.
On November 22, U.S. District Court Judge Terrence W. Boyle, a Reagan appointee, upheld North Carolina’s petition requirements for independent candidates, both for President and for U.S. House. Independent petitions are due on March 3, 2020, for all office. Statewide independents need 71,545 signatures (1.5% of the last gubernatorial vote). U.S. House independents need about 8,000 signatures. Buscemi v Bell, e.d., 7:19cv-164. Here is the 10-page decision.
The decision says, about the March deadline, “North Carolina is constitutionally empowered to regulate the times, places, and manner of elections.” The decision does not mention that in 1983, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Anderson v Celebrezze, 460 US 780, that independent presidential petition deadlines as early as March are unconstitutional. It also doesn’t mention the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Mandel v Bradley, 432 US 173 (1977), that independent candidate petition deadlines for all office are unconstitutionally early if very few independent candidate petitions succeed.
No statewide independent petition in North Carolina has ever succeeded, except for Ross Perot’s 1992 petition, and back then the deadline was June 26.
The decision also does not mention that in 1980, a U.S. District Court in the same district, the Eastern District, invalidated North Carolina’s April petition deadline for independent candidates in Greaves v North Carolina State Board of Elections, 508 F Supp 78.
The decision also does not mention Delaney v Bartlett, 370 F Supp 2d 373 (m.d. 2004), which said that North Carolina could not require statewide independents to collect more signatures than a new party needs. In North Carolina, new parties need 11,778 signatures. The plaintiffs will appeal. The presidential candidate-plaintiff is Kyle Kopitke, an independent presidential candidate who lives in Flint, Michigan. The opinion does say the candidates have standing.
On November 21, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said he will drop his pending appeal in the Ninth Circuit over whether the new California law on tax returns and presidential candidates is constitutional. Because the law violates the State Constitution, according to the California Supreme Court’s November 21 ruling, it is a moot point as to whether the law also violates the U.S. Constitution. UPDATE: the Secretary of State here asks that his appeal be dismissed, but he also wants the Ninth Circuit to erase the U.S. District Court order.
Last month a U.S. District Court had ruled that the law violates the U.S. Constitution. Even if the state could persuade the Ninth Circuit to reverse the U.S. District Court, the law still couldn’t go into effect because of the state constitution.
On November 19, the Eleventh Circuit agreed to expedite the Georgia ballot access case. The Libertarian Party has already filed its main brief. The state’s brief is due December 13, 2019, and the party’s reply brief is due on December 27. The court hasn’t decided yet whether to hold oral argument. The Libertarian Party says no oral argument is needed.
The case, Cowen v Raffensperger, 19-14065, challenges the petition requirement for U.S. House, 5% of the number of registered voters. The law was passed in 1943 and no minor party has ever used it. No independent has used it since 1964. The evidence shows that at least twenty candidates have tried.
