Maine Libertarian Party Permitted to Name a Replacement County Commissioner

Posted on by August 22, 2018
4

On August 21, the Maine Libertarian Party chose Ray Lafrance to be an Androscoggin County Commissioner, to replace Zachery Maher. Because Maher was a Libertarian, the law permitted the Libertarian Party to choose his replacement. See this story.

Maher had switched to the Libertarian Party on September 7, 2017. He had been elected in 2016 to a four-year term. This seat will now have a special election in November 2018, and Lafrance will be on the ballot for the remaining two years as the Libertarian nominee.

Montana Supreme Court Denies Ballot Access Relief to the Green Party

Posted on by August 22, 2018
5

On August 21, the Montana Supreme Court issued a one-page order, saying the Green Party should not be on the ballot. The order says the court will explain its reasoning later. Larson v State of Montana, DA 18-0414.

The only hope for the Green Party to be on the November 2018 ballot is to win its federal court case, which challenges the March 5 petition deadline, and the distribution requirement. Unlike other states with distribution requirements, the Montana distribution requirement does not treat each voter equally. The law requires signatures from each of at least 34 state house districts. But in some of those districts, the party needs as few as 50 signatures, whereas in other such districts, the party needs 150 signatures. Thus, voters in some counties have more power than voters in other districts, because a voter’s signature in some districts has three times the weight of voters in other districts. Such unequal distribution requirements have been invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts in many states.

Michigan Ballot Access Case Likely to Get a Decision in a Week

Posted on by August 22, 2018
2

On August 22, a hearing was held in U.S. District Court in Michigan for the independent candidate ballot access case. The issue is the Michigan law for statewide independent candidates, which requires a petition due in July, even though the primary is not until August. The petition requirement, 30,000 signatures, has been in existence since 1988, but in the years since then, only twice has anyone completed that petition. The case is Graveline v Johnson, e.d., 2:18cv-12354. UPDATE: an earlier version of this post said a decision won’t be rendered until September 12, but that was mistaken. The judge indicated she would rule shortly, perhaps in a week.

New York Times Article Says Indictment of Congressman Duncan Hunter Reveals Flaw in California Top-Two System

Posted on by August 22, 2018
4

On August 21, California Republican congressman Duncan Hunter was indicted for campaign finance law violations. Because he placed first in the June 5 top-two primary, his name is on the November ballot, opposite the Democrat who placed second. If California did not have a top-two system, there would be a petition procedure for an independent candidate to get on the ballot, due in August; and there would be write-in space on the November ballot. But the top-two system in California eliminated the ability of anyone to get on the November ballot, except by placing first and second in the June primary. The top-two law also deleted write-in space from the November ballot.

Adam Nagourney of the Los Angeles Times has a story, “An indictment reveals a pitfall for the top-two system.” UPDATE: this San Diego Union-Tribune article gives more details. It explains that Republicans were worried about the possibility, and had entered another Republican in the June primary, but that other Republican did not get substantial funding and only placed third.

North Carolina Constitution Party Wins Ballot Access Lawsuit

Posted on by August 22, 2018
3

On August 22, U.S. District Court Judge Louise Flanagan, a Bush Jr. appointee, issued a 17-page order in Poindexter v Strach, e.d., 5:18cv-366. The order puts three Constitution Party nominees on the ballot, for legislature and county office. The State Board of Elections had kept them off the ballot because earlier in the year, they had run in Republican or Democratic primaries and lost those primaries. But at the time the Constitution Party nominated them, there was no law preventing a party like the Constitution Party from nominating such “sore losers.”

After the party had nominated them, a new law went into effect barring convention parties from nominating people who had earlier that year lost major party primaries. But the court order says it violates federal due process to make the ballot access laws more restrictive, so that a candidate loses ballot position because of the new law. Thanks to Kevin Hayes for this news.