Both Sides in Colorado “Disobedient Electors” Case Tell the Tenth Circuit Not to Duck the Issue

The Tenth Circuit has jurisdiction of Baca v Griswold, 18-1173, a case over whether presidential electors have a constitutional right to vote for any qualified candidate in the electoral college, or whether they can be “fired” if they vote for someone other than the presidential candidate who got the most votes in that state.

Recently the Tenth Circuit panel asked both sides to discuss some possible procedural objections to the lawsuit. Both sides then filed a joint brief, agreeing with each other that there are no procedural impediments to this case, and asking that the Tenth Circuit decide the issue. The joint brief also contains the interesting information that the Washington state presidential electors case will be brought before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Washington State Supreme Court last month had ruled that it is constitutional to levy a $1,000 fine against presidential electors who “disobey.”

Several Towns in Massachusetts are Trying to Persuade the Legislature to Let Them Allow 17-year-olds, and Non-citizens, to Vote in Local Elections

This article focuses on Amherst, Massachusetts, but also covers several other Massachusetts towns, all of whom are trying to persuade the Massachusetts legislature let them let under-age-18 individuals vote in local elections, and also individuals who are legally in the country but who are not U.S. citizens.

First Day of Trial in Georgia Vote-Counting Machine Lawsuit Described

This Associated Press story describes the first day of the hearing in Curling v Raffensperger, n.d., 1:17cv-2989, conducted on Thursday, July 25. Later there will probably be a similar story describing the second day, Friday. This is the lawsuit over whether the Georgia vote-counting machines are so unreliable that the Constitution bars their use.

Wisconsin Resident, Barred by Alaska Law from Contributing to His Brother-in-Law, Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Overturn Campaign Finance Law

On July 25, three individuals filed a cert petition in the U.S. Supreme Court against two Alaska campaign finance laws. One individual lives in Wisconsin. He wants to contribute to the legislative campaign of his brother-in-law, who is an Alaska legislator running for re-election. But Alaska law says that no Alaska candidate may receive more than $3,000 in total donations from outside the state, and the legislator had already received $3,000 from other out-of-state contributors.

In another issue in the same case, two Alaska residents want to contribute more than $500 to candidates for city office, but Alaska law does not allow anyone to contribute more than $500 to a candidate in any particular calendar year. Nor may they contribute more than $500 to any political group except for a political party. Thompson v Hebdon, 19-122. Here is the cert petition. The Ninth Circuit had upheld the Alaska laws. The state’s response is due August 26, 2019. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.

Working Families Party Will Try to Elect Two of its Own Members to Philadelphia City Council in November 2019

Philadelphia elects seven city council-at-large members in November 2019. The law does not permit any party to run more than five candidates for that office, and voters can only vote for five candidates. Therefore, every election, two non-Democrats are able to win two seats. The last time this office was up, in November 2015, the two non-Democratic winners were two Republican nominees.

The Working Families Part has two candidates for city council-at-large in the November 2019 election, and will try to outpoll all the Republicans, and win the two seats reserved for non-Democrats. The two candidates are Kendra Brooks and Nicolas O’Rourke.

A few cities in Connecticut use the same election system, and in a few instances, Working Families Party nominees (who were not also Democratic nominees) were able to win seats in these Connecticut cities.