The South Carolina Republican Party may cancel its presidential primary in 2020. The decision rests with the party, not the state government. See this story. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.
1
On December 18, U.S. District Court Judge Colin S. Bruce, an Obama appointee, upheld the Illinois petition requirement for U.S. House for independent candidates and the nominees of unqualified parties. Gill v Scholz, 3:16cv-3221. The 22-page opinion says that no trial is needed because it is obvious that the law is constitutional, because in 2017 the Seventh Circuit upheld the 5% petition for legislative candidates in Tripp v Scholz. The two candidate-plaintiffs in Tripp v Scholz needed 2,399 signatures and 2,407 signatures. David Gill, the plaintiff in the U.S. House case, needed 10,754 valid signatures.
The fallacy in this opinion is that the number of signatures needed for a legislative candidate is far less than the number needed for U.S. House, and that is reflected in the history of successful usage of the petition for each type of office. No one has successfully completed the 5% petition for U.S. House in Illinois since 1974, when a candidate succeeded in getting 8,593 valid signatures. This statement is true for all candidates who were challenged. In Illinois, a candidate whose petition is not challenged is put on the ballot automatically if his or her petition contains a number of signatures equal to 10% of the requirement.
By contrast, many independent and unqualified party nominees for Illinois legislature have succeeded in getting on the ballot during the last 50 years, even when they were challenged.
Originally, the Gill case was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Sue Myerscough, another Obama appointee who issued an injunction putting Gill on the ballot in August 2016. The state then appealed, and the Seventh Circuit removed him just before the election, but without explaining why. The case then returned to the U.S. District Court, and a trial was expected. But then the case was re-assigned to Judge Bruce, who wrote today’s opinion and who cancelled the trial.
Ohio Senate Bill 10 is dead. The bill passed the State Senate unanimously last year, but it never received any action in the House. It would have eliminated primary elections when only one person files for a particular office. It would have eliminated the ability of primary voters to nominate a write-in candidate in such elections.
The 2017-2018 session is almost over. Although the Senate is in session, the House will not hold any more proceedings, so the bill can’t advance.
Historian Michael L. Rosin, who lives in New Jersey, has filed this amicus curiae brief in Guerra v Washington State, 95347-3. Like the Independence Institute amicus mentioned in the preceding post, Rosin also argues that the intent of the U.S. Constitution is to give presidential electors freedom to vote for any qualified candidate for President and/or Vice President.
The Washington State Supreme Court will hear Guerra v Washington State, 95347-3, on January 22, 2019. This is the case over whether the state can fine presidential electors who vote for someone for president who did not win the popular vote in that state. The Independence Institute has filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, arguing that the intent of the U.S. Constitution and the people who wrote it was to let presidential electors make their own decision as to who to vote for in the electoral college.