Texas Legislature Passes Bill that Says Candidate Petitions are Deemed Valid, Unless Challenged

On May 16, the Texas legislature passed SB 44 almost unanimously. It says that candidate petitions, whether independent candidates, or candidates seeking to be on a primary ballot, are deemed to have enough valid signatures unless they are challenged. And anyone who challenges must specify which signatures are being challenged; no one can file a “general” challenge.

Here is the text. It adds the sentence “Unless the petition is challenged, the authority is only required to review the petition for facial compliance with the applicable requirements as to form, content, and procedure.” Also, “A challenge must state with specificity how the application does not comply with the applicable requirements as to form, content, and procedure. The authority’s review of the challenge is limited to the specific items challenged and any response filed by the challenged candidate.”

The bill also restores the need for primary candidates for statewide judicial posts to submit a petition, to get on the primary ballot. Such petitions need 50 signatures from each of the 17 State Court of Appeals districts in the state. This primary judicial petition had been in effect in Texas primaries in the past, but it had been repealed for the 2016 election. The absence of the need for a primary petition is one reason the Democratic Party had a full slate of statewide judicial candidates in 2016, something the Democrats had not had in recent elections earlier than 2016. Thanks to Jim Riley for information about SB 44.

Illinois Green Party Files Reply Brief in Ballot Access Case

On May 13, the Illinois Green Party filed its reply brief in the Seventh Circuit in its ballot access case, Tripp v Smart, 16-3469. The issue is the 5% petition for legislative nominees of unqualified parties, as applied to rural districts without centers of population, combined with the requirement that each petition sheet be notarized. The U.S. District Court had upheld all challenged provisions.

Oklahoma Governor Signs Bill Doubling Almost All Candidate Filing Fees

On May 15, Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed SB 323. It roughly doubles all the candidate filing fees. This means the filing fee for independent presidential candidates, and the presidential nominees of unqualified parties, will be $35,000 in 2020, unless the fee is struck down.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lubin v Panish and also Bullock v Carter that filing fees are unconstitutional unless they are needed to keep ballots from being too crowded. Because the new filing fee for Governor will be $2,000, it may be difficult for the state to explain why it needs $35,000 for President.

Rocky De La Fuente Lawsuit Against Arizona Independent Petition Requirement Begins to Move Ahead

Arizona is one of a handful of states that requires more signatures for an independent presidential candidate, than for an entire newly-qualifying party. The only other such states are Florida, Hawaii, New Mexico, and Texas. In 2016, Arizona required 35,514 signatures for an independent presidential candidate, but 20,119 for a entire new party.

Last year, Rocky De La Fuente, an independent presidential candidates, sued Arizona, arguing that there can’t be any state interest in requiring more signatures for a single candidate than for a new party, because a new party might cause hundreds of names to be added to a general election ballot, whereas obviously an independent candidate petition only adds one name. The lawsuit, De La Fuente v Reagan, 2:16cv-2419, got a very slow start, but it is finally underway. Discovery must be completed by August 11, 2017.

De La Fuente had filed a similar lawsuit against Oklahoma, which formerly had the same characteristic, but that case was mooted when the 2017 legislature eased the independent presidential petition procedure so that it is less difficult than the new party petition requirement.