According to this story at FrontloadingHQ, it seems likely that the Kentucky Republican Party won’t use its presidential primary in 2020. Kentucky has been holding presidential primaries for major parties since 1976 (although it didn’t hold any in 1984).

The state recognizes the ability of a major party to tell the state not to hold a presidential primary for itself. In 2016, the Kentucky Republican Party also told the state not to hold a presidential primary for itself. That was because U.S. Senator Rand Paul was running for re-election, and the law did not permit him to be on the May primary ballot both for U.S. Senate and president. So to help him, the Republican Party canceled the 2016 presidential primary. It seems likely the Republican Party wants to cancel its 2020 primary in order to make it easier for President Trump to avoid having to worry about any challengers to him in a primary.

The Libertarian Party is also ballot-qualified in Kentucky, but it is not entitled to its own primary for president or any other office. Parties need to have polled 20% in the last election to have a government-administered primary.

An initiative is circulating in Alaska that would end the ability of political parties to nominate candidates, except in presidential elections. It would require all candidates to appear on the August primary ballot. Then, the top four candidates from the primary would be the only candidates who could appear on the general election ballot. The general election ballot would use ranked choice voting. Without ranked choice voting, the general election ballot in many cases would feature three candidates from one party, and only one from another party, which would be obviously unfair to the party with three candidates.

The initiative combines that idea with campaign finance restrictions. The description of the initiative, as shown on the petitions, starts with this sentence: “Prohibits the use of dark money by independent expenditure groups working to influence candidate elections in Alaska and require additional disclosures by these groups.”

This initiative seems to violate the rule that requires initiatives to be on single subjects. Furthermore, it is irrational for the proponents to retain the primary. If parties will no longer nominate candidates, and ranked choice voting will be used, one wonders why the primary should be retained.

The initiative makes it more difficult for parties to retain their place on the ballot. Current law lets them remain on with either a vote test or a registration test. The initiative eliminates the vote test.

Proponents need 28,501 signatures. If they complete the drive by early 2020, it would appear on the November 2020 ballot. If they take longer, it would appear on the 2022 ballot. Thanks to Rob Richie for this news.

On August 7, the California Supreme Court asked the Secretary of State to respond to Patterson v Padilla, S257302. This is the lawsuit filed by the California Republican Party and its state chairwoman on August 6, challenging the new California law requiring presidential primary candidates to reveal their income tax returns.

The court wants the state’s response by noon August 14, and then the reply by August 16. Although there is no guarantee the Court will accept the case, it seems very likely, given this quick interest from the court. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.