A bill to improve Oklahoma ballot access is on the House calendar for April 25. It eases the definition of “political party.” Current law requires a party to poll 2.5% of the vote for the office at the top of the ballot every two years (President, Governor). SB 350 changes that to 2.5% for any statewide race at either of the last two elections. Last year it passed the State Senate, and the House committees. Oklahoma has two-year legislative sessions. UPDATE: this post has been re-written; the original post said SB 350 was not likely to pass, but that was inaccurate.

Another bill, SB 1038, is not likely to pass. It would have eased the filing fee for candidates whose income places them below the poverty level. It would also have eased the petition in lieu of filing fee for such candidates. It had passed the Senate but is not likely to be brought up for a vote in the House.

The Libertarian Party is now on the ballot, but it won’t remain on the ballot after November 2018 unless it polls at least 2.5% for Governor, or unless the bill is signed into law. The last time a third party was on the ballot in an Oklahoma midterm year was 1998, when the Reform Party was on. The Reform Party gubernatorial nominee only polled 1.21%.

On April 18, the Utah Republican Party filed this request for rehearing in Utah Republican Party v Cox, 16-4091. The issue is the state law that forces the party to let candidates without substantial support at a party meeting petition onto the party’s primary ballot. The party is not opposed to having a primary, but it only wants candidates on its primary ballot with significant support at party endorsement meetings. The Tenth Circuit had upheld the law by a vote of 2-1.

On April 19, the Tenth Circuit asked the state to respond to the petition for rehearing. This is a good sign for the party. Generally when courts receive a request for rehearing, they do not ask the other side to respond, and typically then reject the rehearing request. The state’s response is due May 15.

On April 23, some U.S. citizens who formerly lived in Illinois, and who moved to Guam, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Segovia v U.S, 17-1463. Here is the cert petition.

Illinois law would have permitted them to continue voting by absentee ballot if they had moved to any foreign country, or to American Samoa. But they can’t vote any longer because they now live in one of the three above-listed U.S. territories.

The Seventh Circuit had ruled that they lack standing to sue.