U.S. District Court Cancels Trial in Lawsuit Over Arkansas Non-Presidential Independent Candidate Deadline

On July 17, a U.S. District Court in Arkansas cancelled the upcoming trial in Moore v Martin, the case that challenges the 2014 and 2018 petition deadline for non-presidential independent candidates. The 2013 legislature had moved the deadline from May to March, even though three times before, similar independent candidate petition deadlines had been struck down (in 1975, 1977 and 1988).

Instead of a trial, there will be an oral argument on July 27 on whether the case can be decided without a trial, on the precedents. IF, after the oral argument, the judge decides there needs to be a trial, then the trial will be some time later than July 27.

Independently of all that, the 2015 legislature moved the non-presidential independent candidate deadline to November 2015, for the 2016 election only. The existing lawsuit does not deal with the 2016 deadline.

New York Times Carries Letter to the Editor from Oliver Hall, Defending Electoral Activity Outside the Two Major Parties

Oliver Hall, ballot access attorney for Ralph Nader and also ballot access attorney for several minor parties over the last decade, has this letter in the print edition of the New York Times, February 17. The letter rebuts the implication by Todd Gitlin (in an article published in the July 12 issue) that electoral activity should be confined to the two major parties.

Roll Call Article Shows Very Few Republican U.S. House Members Face Significant Primary Challenges

This Roll Call analysis shows that in 2014, only four Republican members of the U.S. House were defeated in primaries, and generally those four defeats were not caused because the incumbent was too “centrist.” The article also shows that so far, only six incumbent Republicans in the U.S. House seem likely to face a strong primary challenge.

This article rebuts the assumption commonly made by supporters of top-two systems that “90% of elections are decided in the primaries.”

Oregon Supreme Court Clears Away Procedural Barriers to Lawsuit Challenging Restriction on Petitioners

On July 16, the Oregon Supreme Court issued this opinion in Couey v Atkins, S061650. The case had been filed in 2010 by a petitioner, to challenge a 2009 law that makes it illegal for anyone to simultaneously be a paid circulator for one petition and a volunteer petitioner for another ballot measure. The Oregon Supreme Court did not actually settle that question. But it said the lower courts should resolve it. The lower courts had refused to issue an opinion on the main issue, because of various procedural problems, such as whether the case is moot. Thanks to Dan Meek for the link.