Texas Removes Requirement That Candidate Petitions be Checked for Validity

Posted on by June 16, 2017
2

On May 23, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed SB 44. It makes two somewhat unrelated changes. It restores the old requirement that judicial candidates, seeking a place on a statewide primary ballot, need 950 signatures even if they pay the filing fee. Such petitions need 50 signatures from each of the 19 judicial districts. In the past this petition requirement has sometimes discouraged Democrats from running a full slate of partisan judicial nominees. The petition was not in effect during 2016 and the Democrats did run a full slate in 2016, for the first time since 2002. Now that the petition requirement is back, that makes it somewhat more likely that Democrats won’t run a full slate in 2018.

Also, SB 44 says that candidate petitions need not be checked for validity, unless some files a challenge. If someone does file a challenge, the challenge must state explicitly what signatures are invalid. Thanks to Jim Riley for this news.

Some Democratic Voters in Pennsylvania Sue to Overturn Partisan Gerrymander for U.S. House Districts

Posted on by June 15, 2017
4

On June 15, some Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, plus the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, filed a lawsuit in state court, alleging that the U.S. House districts in Pennsylvania since 2011 constitute an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The case is based on both the U.S. constitution and the Pennsylvania constitution. League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Commonwealth Court. Here is the Complaint. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

New Jersey 2017 Legislative Elections

Posted on by June 15, 2017
Reply

New Jersey and Virginia are the only states holding regularly-scheduled legislative elections this year. In New Jersey, this year there are five Green Party nominees, five Libertarian Party nominees, and 19 independent candidates on the ballot for legislature.

By contrast, in 2015, there were eight Greens, two Libertarians, and eight independent candidates on the ballot for legislature.

California Bill Moving Primary for All Office From June to March, in Presidential Years, Advances

Posted on by June 14, 2017
7

On June 14, the California Assembly Elections Committee passed SB 568 by 4-1. It moves the primary for all office, in presidential years, from June to March. If enacted, it would mean that no one could get on the November ballot for Congress or state partisan office unless he or she filed in the year before the election. The California Secretary of State, Alex Padilla, testified in favor of the bill. But he did not focus attention on the part of the bill that affects congressional and state office elections. Court precedents are unanimous that states cannot close off all routes to the November ballot with a filing deadline that early. When California had a March primary for all office in the past, that was at a time when it was still possible for independent candidates to petition onto the November ballot as late as mid-August of the election year.

It seems clear that the bill will pass the Assembly, because the Assembly this year already passed a similar bill, AB 84. The only difference between AB 84 and SB 568 is that SB 568 calls for a primary in late March, with the provision that the Governor has the power to move it to an earlier date (but not to a later date). AB 84 sets the primary in early March but has no provision for the Governor to shift the date.

Attorneys for Ohio Libertarian Party Win Some Attorneys Fees

Posted on by June 15, 2017
Reply

The Ohio Libertarian Party engaged in a long court battle, in federal court, with attorneys for the Ohio Republican Party and the Governor John Kasich re-election campaign during 2014. The issue was whether the Libertarian Party’s gubernatorial candidate should appear on the Libertarian Party primary ballot and thereby gain a place on the general election ballot. The Libertarian did not prevail on the ballot access issue.

However, the attorneys for the Libertarian candidate and the Libertarian Party did receive $42,500 in attorneys’ fees, which were awarded on May 1, 2017. This is because they did prevail on the issue of whether the party should be considered a qualified party during 2014, and on the issue of the out-of-state ban for petitioners. Those parts of the case had been won in late 2013 and early 2014.

In addition, on June 12, the federal court also awarded sanctions of $1,500 to the attorneys for the Libertarian Party, against the attorneys for the Republican Party. This is because the court determined that the Republican attorneys had filed subpoenas against the Libertarian Party attorneys that were not designed for a legitimate purpose, but “to badger or intimidate” the Libertarian Party attorneys. See this story.

UPDATE: see this story.