The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Hall v Merrill, 18-1362, on October 1, 2019. This is the Alabama ballot access case in which a U.S. District Court struck down the 3% petition for independent candidates for U.S. House in special elections, given that the petitioning time is so short. Afterwards, the Eleventh Circuit said the U.S. District Court should not have ruled, because the election was over. The U.S. Supreme Court said in 1969 that constitutional ballot access cases are not moot just because the election is over. But the Eleventh Circuit said the rule is different for special elections. There is no other precedent that comes to that conclusion, and the Eleventh Circuit opinion is in conflict with precedents from almost all other circuits.

Jeremy B. White here writes for Politico that a side effect of the California tax returns-ballot bill, if it is not invalidated in court, would be to lower Republican turnout in the March 2020 primary. Because California has its primary for all office in March, and because the top-two system requires Republicans for Congress and partisan state office to place first or second in March, Republican turnout (without Trump on its presidential primary ballot) could be depressed, which in turn would damage Republicans running for Congress and state legislature. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

On August 13, the Arkansas Libertarian Party responded to the Secretary of State’s letter that asks the Eighth Circuit to temporarily remove the party from the 2020 ballot. The Secretary of State had told the Eighth Circuit that the U.S. District Court decision putting the party on the ballot is mistaken. The Secretary of State letter had said the overwhelming weight of authority shows that the new ballot access law that was enjoined should have been upheld (it almost tripled the number of signatures needed for new parties).

The Arkansas Libertarian Party letter, like the Secretary of State’s letter, was sharply limited in length by court rules.