North Carolina Senate Refuses to Concur in the House Amendments to the Ballot Access Bill

On June 29, the North Carolina Senate refused to concur in the House amendments to the ballot access bill, SB 656. The bill had passed both houses but the versions differ. The chief difference is that the House version has more difficult requirements for independent candidates than the Senate version. The bill will now go to a conference committee. But it is possible the legislature will adjourn before that process can be carried out.

North Carolina has two-year legislative sessions, so if no further action is taken this week, the bill is still alive and can move ahead in 2018. Unfortunately the bill’s author, Senator Andrew Brock, is resigning from the Senate soon and he won’t be there in 2018 to guide the bill. Thanks to Kevin Hayes for this news.

Arkansas Plans to Ask for U.S. Supreme Court Review, in Case Over Petition Deadline for Non-Presidential Independent Candidates

As already reported, on April 26, the Eighth Circuit ruled that the March petition deadline for non-presidential independent candidates is likely unconstitutional unless the state can show that it must have a deadline that early, in order to have time to check the validity of such petitions. Moore v Martin, 15-3558. Therefore, the judges remanded the case back to U.S. District Court to give the state an opportunity to demonstrate its needs. One of the three judges, however, wrote that the deadline is clearly unconstitutional and there is no need for a remand.

Arkansas has decided to appeal this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Its cert petition is due July 25. It is very unusual for a state to ask for U.S. Supreme Court review when it loses a constitutional ballot access case. The last instance was in 2009, when Arizona asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the Ninth Circuit opinion in Nader v Brewer, which struck down the Arizona independent presidential petition deadline of June. The Supreme Court denied Arizona’s request. The Arizona legislature then moved that deadline to September, one of the latest such deadlines in the nation.

Eleventh Circuit Wants Oral Argument in Case Involving Petition Requirements in Special Elections

On June 28, the Eleventh Circuit said it wants oral argument in Hall v Merrill, 16-16766. This is the case on whether Alabama can require petitions of 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, for independent candidates and newly-qualifying parties, in special elections. Last year the U.S. District Court had ruled that because the petitioning time is so short in special elections, the state can’t require such a high number of signatures. The state then filed a notice of appeal to the Eleventh Circuit. Briefs are already submitted.