Maryland Libertarian Party Files Opening Brief in Fourth Circuit in Ballot Access Case

Here is the Maryland Libertarian Party’s opening Brief in Johnston v Lamone, in the Fourth Circuit. The issue is whether it makes any sense for a party that has over 22,000 registered members, to be forced to file a petition signed by 10,000 voters to get back on the ballot. The party argues that the petition is completely redundant, because it is obvious that at least 10,000 voters want the party on the ballot; otherwise they wouldn’t be registered in the party.

This case is a case of first impression. There has never before been any party in this situation, in any state. The U.S. District Court had ruled against the party, speculating (with no evidence) that perhaps the 22,000 registrants are no longer interested in the party, but remain registered in it because of inertia.

South Carolina Politics Blog “Fitsnews” Carries Analysis of South Carolina Republican Party’s Decision to Cancel 2020 Presidential Primary

Justin Alexander has this interesting analysis of the recent decision by the South Carolina Republican Party to cancel the 2020 presidential primary. It appears in Fitsnews, a South Carolina politics blog based in Columbia. As Alexander notes, the decision was not made by the Republican state convention, so it appears to be a decision that flouts the party’s own rules. He predicts that one of the Republican presidential candidates will sue the party.

Colorado Initiative Proponents Ask for Rehearing En Banc; Judges Asks State to Respond

On September 2, the proponents of a statewide initiative in Colorado asked the Tenth Circuit to rehear Semple v Griswold, 18-1123. This is the case that challenges the Colorado requirement that a statewide initiative obtain signatures equal to 2% of the registered voters in every State Senate district. The U.S. District Court had struck down the requirement, but the Tenth Circuit had reversed by a 2-1 vote. Here is the rehearing request.

On September 5, the three judges on the original panel asked the state to respond. The response is due in October 7.

Political Scientist Lee Drutman Summarizes Research Showing “Moderates” and “Independents” are Not the Same People

Political Scientist Lee Drutman here presents the evidence that “moderates” and “independents” are not the same group of people. The research is at FiveThirtyEight.com. Drutman is writing a book, not yet published, about the crisis of the two-party system in the United States. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.

Arizona Democratic State Committee Rejects Motion to Let Independents Vote in Presidential Primary

On September 21, the Arizona Democratic State Committee rejected a motion to invite independents to vote in the party’s 2020 presidential primary. See this story.

Democrats appear naive about the costs of the lawsuit that would have been required, if the party had chosen to go ahead and let independents to vote in their presidential primary. Some Democrats felt it would cost at least $50,000 to sue the state. But there is no doubt that the party would have won the case, because the U.S. Supreme Court already decided in 1986 that parties can invite independents to vote in their primaries if they wish. Therefore, even if the party did need to file a lawsuit, the state would probably have conceded. And if the state didn’t concede, the party would have won the case and then the state would have had to pay the party’s attorney fees.