U.S. District Court Declines to Put Shiva Ayyadurai on Nebraska Ballot as Independent Presidential Candidate

On October 17, U.S. District Court Judge John M. Gerrard, an Obama appointee, issued an order in Lauters v Evnen, 4:24cv-03175. It denies the request of Shiva Ayyadurai to be placed on the Nebraska ballot as an independent presidential candidate. The petition had enough valid signatures, but he was kept off the ballot because he was born in India.

The decision says that the March 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision Trump v Anderson only pertains to the “Insurrection clause” of the 14th amendment, but the Nebraska decision does not quote from Trump v Anderson, and if one reads Trump v Anderson carefully, it does not limit its holding to that part of the Constitution.

Ohio Secretary of State Sued for Reviving Voter Challenge Procedures that were Struck Down in 2006

In 2006, a U.S. District Court in Ohio struck down Ohio laws that say when a voter is challenged at the polls on the grounds of citizenship, he or she must produce proof of citizenship on the spot, at the polls. Afterwards, Ohio election officials stopped doing that, and instead someone who is challenged must be allowed to vote upon stating under penalty of perjury that he or she is eligible.

But in October 2024, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose revived the old procedures, not withstanding the 2006 decision. Here is the brief filed by the ACLU to stop the Secretary’s recent action. The action is filed in the original 2006 lawsuit, which is now called Boustani v LaRose, n.d., 1:06cv-2065. It is not known which U.S. District Court judge has the case.

New York Times Article on Minor Party and Independent Presidential Candidates Has Odd Omissions

On October 23, the New York Times ran this story about some minor party and independent presidential candidates. It features Cornel West, Jill Stein, Chase Oliver, and Claudia De la Cruz, in that order.

But the story fails to say that New York state is the only state in which no minor party or independent candidates are on the presidential ballot, even though the national Libertarian Party sent out a press release about this a week earlier. In fact, it appears no general media in New York state have mentioned this startling fact.

The New York Times story is also odd because it doesn’t mention Randall Terry, the Constitution Party nominee. Although he is only on the ballot in twelve states (whereas Cornel West is on in fifteen states), the states in which Terry is on the ballot have more voters than the states in which West is on the ballot.

Fifth Circuit Rules that Mississippi Law, Allowing Postal Ballots to be Received Up to Five Days After Election, Violates Federal Law

On October 25, the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in Republican National Committee v Wetzel, 24-60395. It says that Mississippi cannot count ballots received in the postal mail later than election day. The decision interprets federal law to mean that all ballots received after election day are void.

The lower court had upheld Mississippi’s law. The Fifth Circuit opinion conflicts with many other precedents from other circuits.

The decision is by Judge Andrew Oldham and is also signed by Judges James Ho and Kyle Duncan. All three are Trump appointees.

The judges determined that their ruling should not go into effect until 2025.

Peter Sonski is Only Declared Write-in Presidential Candidate in California

The California deadline for filing as a write-in candidate has closed. The only presidential candidate who qualified is Peter Sonski, nominee of the American Solidarity Party. Califoria recently made it even more difficult to qualify as a declared write-in for president, by requiring not only 54 presidential elector candidates, but also 54 alternate presidential elector candidates. All 108 individuals must fill out a notarized declaration of candidacy.

This is the first time since the write-in procedure has existed in California that only one presidential candidate has qualified. California has had the system in place since 1951. California was the first state to have a declaration of write-in procedure.

The law is discriminatory, because presidential elector candidates of qualified parties need not fill out any declaration of candidacy. The state party leaders submit the list to the Secretary of State, without any evidence that the individuals on the list even know they have been nominated.