U.S. District Court Orders North Carolina to Implement New Districts for Some Legislative Races

Posted on by January 19, 2018
4

On January 19, a 3-judge U.S. District Court issued a 92-page opinion in Covington v State, m.d., 1:15cv-399. It orders the state to use districts drawn up by the court’s expert, for state legislature. The invalidated districts had already been held to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

This case has nothing to do with the North Carolina case over whether the U.S. House districts constitute an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. That case, Rucho v Common Cause, had resulted in a recent U.S. District Court order striking down the U.S. House districts. But on January 18, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay in that case (17A745), so the current U.S. House districts will be used in 2018. Justices Ruth Ginsburg and Elena Sotomayor voted to deny the stay. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

Florida Constitution Revision Commission Likely To Tinker Slightly with Florida’s Closed Primaries

Posted on by January 19, 2018
2

The Florida Constitution Revision Commission has the power to put proposed constitutional changes on the November 2018 ballot. According to this story, the part of the Commission that studies election law changes is recommending one change in Florida’s closed primary. Currently if members of only one party file for a particular partisan office, then that party’s primary for that office is open to all registered voters. The change would say an election is deemed to have candidates from only one party, even if there is a write-in candidate in the general election for that particular office.

Florida has a huge proportion of partisan races with candidates from only one party. That is because Florida has such severe filing fees, twice as high as any other state’s filing fees (6% of the office annual salary; Georgia is second with 3% of the salary). In many of these one-party elections, someone who is in league with the party will file as a write-in candidate, thus closing the primary for that particular office to only party members. Public hostility toward this trick is motivating the Revision Commission to change the law to ignore write-ins for the purpose of determining whether a primary is closed or open.

According to the story, the Commission is not recommending converting all Florida primaries from closed to semi-closed. A semi-closed primary is one in which independent voters can choose a primary ballot.

Texas Court Puts Candidate Back on Ballot Despite Her Leaving a Few Entries Blank on Declaration of Candidacy

Posted on by January 19, 2018
3

On January 19, a Texas lower state court put incumbent Judge Teresa Hawthorne back on the Democratic primary ballot. The party had removed her because she didn’t fill in all the blanks on her declaration of candidacy. And in the blank for “party” she wrote the date of the election. See this story.

Third Circuit Hearing on Out-of-State Ban on Circulators for Primary Petitions

Posted on by January 19, 2018
1

The Third Circuit hears Wilmuth v Guadagno, 17-1925, on Tuesday, January 23. The issue is New Jersey’s ban on out-of-state circulators for primary election petitions. The lower court had upheld the ban, on the theory that the Democratic and Republican Parties (the only parties that hold primaries in New Jersey) don’t want out-of-state circulators for candidates in their primaries. However, neither major party has ever expressed an opinion; the U.S. District Court just assumed that the major parties don’t want out-of-state circulators.

The plaintiff, Shawn Wilmuth, wanted to circulate presidential primary petitions for Republican presidential candidates in the 2016 primary. He says he is a Republican himself, but because he lives in Michigan, he was not permitted to work in New Jersey.

The three judges will be Thomas Hardiman (a Bush Jr. appointee), and Thomas Vanaskie and Patty Shwartz (Obama appointees).

Seventh Circuit Denies Voting Rights Relief to Citizens Who Once Lived in Illinois and Now Live in Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico

Posted on by January 19, 2018
5

On January 18, the 7th circuit issued a 12-page opinion in Segovia v U.S., 16-4240. The plaintiffs are U.S. citizens who live in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or Guam. They cannot vote absentee in Illinois elections, even though they formerly were residents of Illinois and had been voting there. U.S. law says if they had moved out of Illinois into a foreign country, or American Samoa, or the Northern Mariana Islands, then they could continue to vote absentee in Illinois elections. But both Illinois law and federal law say they can’t continue to vote absentee in Illinois elections if they live in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or Guam.

The decision says that Illinois law doesn’t violate equal protection. The reason Illinois law treats residents of American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands differently is because it is an old law, written when the Northern Mariana Islands was a United Nations trusteeship instead of a true U.S. possession. The plaintiffs are very likely to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which, for decades now, has rejected all cases involving voting rights for citizens who live in U.S. possessions.

The opinion is by Judge Daniel Manion, a Reagan appointee; and signed by Judges Ilana Rovner, a Bush Sr. appointee, and David Hamilton, an Obama appointee.