California Answers Complaint in California Party Labels Case

On April 10, attorneys for the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters filed this Answer to the Complaint, in Soltysik v Padilla, c.d., 2:15cv-7916. On April 9, attorneys for the Californoia Secretary of State filed this Answer.

Soltysik v Padilla is the case that challenges the California law that permits some candidates, but not all candidates, to have a partisan label on the ballot next to their names.

The case was revived by the Ninth Circuit earlier this year, so now it is proceeding in U.S. District Court. Both the state answer, and the Los Angeles County answer, claim that the plaintiff, Emidio Soltysik, lacks standing. He was and is a registered Socialist. He ran for the legislature in 2014. He was forced to have “party preference: none” on the ballot next to his name.

“City and State” Publishes Analysis of All Ideas for Forcing President Trump to Reveal his Tax Returns

City and State is a weekly print publication published in New York city. It has this analysis of all efforts underway, by various governments, to see President Trump’s tax returns. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link. In the article, Hasen expresses uncertainty about the constitutionality of using ballot access laws for the purpose of forcing the President to reveal his tax returns.

Missouri Bill for Closed Primaries Advances

On March 27, Missouri HB 26 passed a procedural vote in the House, by a vote of 78-72. It changes Missouri from an open primary state to a closed primary state. It still hasn’t passed the House on final reading. There was to have been a vote on April 2, but it was postponed.

Currently the Missouri voter registration form does not ask applicants to choose a party. The bill would place a question about political party affiliation on the form. It also provides that no one can vote in a party primary unless he or she has been a registered member of that party for at least 23 weeks before the primary.

The bill is flawed in several ways. It does not permit a party to nominate anyone who has not been a member for 23 weeks, but such laws cannot be applied to new parties, according to every court that has considered the matter. It isn’t fair to limit a new party to nominating only those people who had been members, at a point before the party was qualified. New parties don’t submit their petitions until the end of July.

Also the bill doesn’t acknowledge that the U.S. Supreme Court has said that parties that want independents to vote in their primaries have a right to make that decision. Finally, the bill doesn’t let voters register into an unqualified party.