U.S. District Court Enjoins Texas Law that Compelled Speech about Government Employees’ Attitudes Toward Israel

Posted on by April 26, 2019
4

On August 25, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Pitman enjoyed a Texas law that requires anyone who contracts to do any work for any governmental entity in the state to pledge that he or she does not support an economic boycott of Israel.  Here is the decision in Amawi v Pflugerville Independent School District, w.d., 1:18cv-1091.  The First Amendment protects the right of individuals to speak, and also the right of individuals not to be compelled to speak.

This is not an election law decision, but it is a free speech decision, and the connection between free speech and election law is strong, and ought to be even stronger.  Thanks to the Institute for Free Speech for the link.

U.S. District Court Strikes Down Some Michigan Congressional and Legislative Districts as a Partisan Gerrymander

Posted on by April 26, 2019
11

On April 25, a 3-judge U.S. District Court struck down some of Michigan’s U.S. House and legislative districts, because they were part of an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander by Republican legislators.  Here is the 146-page decision in League of Women Voters v Benson, e.d., 2:17cv-14148.

The decision is by Judge Eric Clay, a Clinton appointee.  It is also signed by Judge Denise Hood, a Clinton appointee; and Gordon Qust, a Bush Sr. appointee.  The decision says that new districts must be drawn up in time for the 2020 election.  Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

Texas Bill Advances to Require Convention Nominees to Pay Filing Fees

Posted on by April 26, 2019
2

On April 1, the Texas House Elections Committee passed HB 2504 by 7-2.  It requires candidates nominated by convention to pay filing fees, or submit a petition in lieu of a filing fee.  Current law says that the only candidates who pay filing fees are those seeking a place on a primary ballot.

The logic of the two U.S. Supreme Court filing fee decisions, Bullock v Carter and Lubin v Panish, suggests that requiring candidates nominated in a convention to pay a filing fee would be unconstitutional.  The two decisions say that filing fees harm voting rights, and therefore they can only exist if they are necessary to keep ballots from being crowded with too many candidates.  But there are no public ballots at conventions; parties run their own conventions without government involvement.  And the Texas general election ballot is not crowded because the ballot access laws are so severe.

The bill does not require independent candidates to pay a filing fee.  If the bill is signed into law, the only immediate effect would be on Libertarian Party candidates.  The Libertarian Party is the only ballot-qualified party that nominates by convention.  The bill is now pending in the House Calendars Committee.  Thanks to Linda Curtis for this news.

Iowa Legislature Abandons Plans to Increase Number of Signatures, but Passes Bill Moving Non-Presidential Deadline to March

Posted on by April 25, 2019
2

On April 25, both houses of the Iowa legislature passed HF 692 unanimously.  It is an omnibus election law bill.  It does not increase the number of signatures for independent candidates, or the nominees of unqualified parties.  But it does move the petition deadline, for all office except president, to mid-March.  The Iowa primary is in June, so the deadline change, if signed into law, would almost surely be held unconstitutional.  The U.S. Supreme Court has said the whole purpose of having procedures for independent candidates is to let voters find someone new to vote for, it the two major party nominees are displeasing to a significant segment of the voters.  This applies to all office, not just president.

Earlier this month there had been attempts to increase the number of signatures for independent candidates and the nominees of unqualified parties, but the Libertarian and Green Parties and the Iowa ACLU helped persuade legislators to abandon this idea.