California Governor Signs Bill Easing Ballot Access for Presidential Primaries

On July 30, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 505, which makes it easier for a candidate to get on a presidential primary ballot. The old law says the Secretary of State should put all “recognized” candidates on the presidential primary ballot of the party whose nomination the candidate is seeking. But it is very vague. For minor party presidential primaries, the Secretary of State has traditionally let the state chair of the party tell him or her whom to list. However, in 2016, Secretary of State Alex Padilla did not entirely follow that tradition. He refused to let the Peace & Freedom Party list Jill Stein, and he disallowed many candidates suggested by the American Independent Party.

SB 505 says a candidate can be on a California presidential primary if he or she is on the presidential primary ballot of at least one other state. It also says a candidate can be listed if the party wants that candidate on its primary ballot, and also the candidate has a campaign web page.

The Peace & Freedom Party, and the Green Party, worked effectively to transform SB 505. When it was first introduced, it was quite restrictive, but their lobbying improved the bill.

SB 505 says nothing about presidential tax returns. But because it fleshes out which candidates are “recognized” (i.e., those candidates who meet the SB 505 conditions), it will make it easier for various presidential candidates to sue over the tax returns bill, should they wish to do so.

California Governor Signs Presidential Tax Returns Bill for Presidential Primary Ballot Access

On July 30, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 27, which requires presidential primary candidates who want to have their names on the ballot to file five years of their federal income tax returns. Here is the Governor’s statement.

The Governor quoted three attorneys who say the bill is constitutional. One of them, Theodore Boutrous, said, “It will apply to any candidate for President, whether Republican, Democrat, or independent.” This is factually incorrect. The bill has no effect on independent presidential candidates, because it only relates to candidates running in a presidential primary, and independent presidential candidates have no connection with California’s presidential primary. Also the bill does not pertain to write-in candidates (in either the primary or general election), nor to party presidential nominees who appear on the November ballot.

Neither the Governor, nor any of the three attorneys he quoted, even mentions the California Constitution, which says in Article II, sec. 5(c), “The candidates on the (presidential primary) ballot are those found by the Secretary of State to be recognized candidates throughout the nation or throughout California.”

Kansas State Senator Changes Registration from Independent to Republican

Kansas State Senator John Doll had changed his registration from Republican to independent in March 2018. He recently changed back to Republican. He was last elected in 2016, to a four-year term, and says he hasn’t decided whether he will run for re-election in 2020.

In 2018, he was an independent candidate for Lieutenant Governor, on the ticket headed by independent gubernatorial candidate Greg Orman. During the years he was an independent state senator, he was given no committee assignments.

Ninth Circuit Agrees with U.S. District Court that Guam Can’t Hold a Plebiscite on Future of Guam That is Limited to Descendants of 1898 Inhabitants

On July 29, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Davis v Guam, 17-15719. The issue was whether Guam could hold a plebiscite and limit the voting to individuals who are descendants of people who were living in Guam in 1898, the year control passed from Spain to the United States. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the U.S. District Court that the 15th amendment to the U.S. Constitution bars that limit on which voters can vote. The 15th amendment says, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news.

Republicans Sue To Overturn Michigan Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission

On July 30, various groups and individuals associated with the Michigan Republican Party filed a federal lawsuit to invalidate the 2018 initiative that set up a non-partisan redistricting commission. Daunt v Benson, w.d., 1:19cv-614. Here is the 32-page complaint. Like the redistricting commissions in some other states, the new Michigan commission lets private individuals draw the district boundaries for U.S. House and legislature.

Applicants for the commission must be devoid of connections to partisan organizations and to partisan individuals. The Michigan lawsuit argues that this policy violates the U.S. Supreme Court decisions that outlawed making government employment conditional on the job applicant’s party. However, those U.S. Supreme Court opinions do not apply to governmental jobs that involve making policy. Thanks to Thomas Jones and Rick Hasen for the news about the lawsuit.