The Commission on Presidential Debates had chosen Dayton, Ohio, for the first presidential debate. That was set for Monday, September 26. However, on July 19, Wright State University, the location for that debate, said it cannot handle the debate. See this story. Thanks to Steve Linnabary for the link.
The Hawaii Green Party had a very strong candidate for the legislature in 2012. Keiko Bonk placed second in a 3-party race in the 20th State House district, polling 31.35%. In her district, as well as some other districts, local officials ran out of ballots. Some voters did not want to wait until more ballots could be printed, and left without voting.
The Green Party sued. On July 19, 2016, the Hawaii Supreme Court issued this unanimous opinion, affirming that state election officials had broken the law. The case is Green Party of Hawaii v Nago, SCWC-14-1313. The lower courts had ruled against the Green Party.
On July 19, U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Adelman, a Clinton, issued an order in Frank v Walker, e.d., 11-cv-1128. This is the case filed in 2011 over Wisconsin’s law requiring voters at the polls to show photo I.D. The order says the state must let voters vote if they sign a declaration at the polls that says, under penalty of perjury, that they have been unable to obtain photo I.D. The form will list a checkbox of possible reasons: “lack of transportation, lack of documents, work schedule, disability or illness, family responsibilities, or other (fill in blank).”
Here is the 46-page decision. The part of the decision starting at page 20 explains the barriers that some voters face when they try to take advantage of the state law that permits them to obtain a free I.D. The free I.D. can’t be issued without documents proving the person’s identity. The decision goes into details of the difficulties this causes for certain particular voters.
On July 19, the Kansas ACLU filed a new lawsuit in Kansas state court, over whether the Secretary of State has authority to set up two lists of registered voters. Kris Kobach, the Secretary of State, has created a list of registered voters who used the federal voter registration form, and a separate list for those who used the state form. Persons on the first list will only be allowed to vote for Congress in the upcoming August 2 primary.
The lawsuit, Marvin Brown v Kobach, argues that the Kansas Constitution and election laws contain no authorization for two separate lists of registered voters. The new lawsuit will probably be decided very quickly, because the primary is only two weeks away. The case is filed in Shawnee County.
The Connecticut Secretary of State has rejected Rocky De La Fuente’s petition to be an independent candidate, on the basis that the petition lists two residents of Florida for President and Vice-President. The petition lists De La Fuente for President and Michael Steinberg for Vice-President. Both currently live in Florida.
Connecticut’s rejection says the U.S. Constitution does not permit Connecticut presidential electors to vote for this ticket. The Secretary of State is wrong. The 12th amendment only bars presidential electors from voting from someone from the same state as those electors for both President and Vice-President. It says, “The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.” The Secretary of State is ignoring the last two words.
Furthermore, even aside from that, if Rocky De La Fuente’s electors won the election in Connecticut on November 8, either the presidential candidate or the vice-presidential candidate would be free to move to another state before mid-December, when the electors vote. This point was made in Jones v Bush, a lawsuit filed in 2000 over whether the Texas Republican presidential electors would be permitted to vote for both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. The lawsuit alleged that both Bush and Cheney were living in Texas. The U.S. District Court said Cheney could claim residence in Wyoming, but even aside from that, even if he were a Texan, he would be free to move to another state before the electoral college voted. The Constitutional language only refers to residence at the time the electoral college votes, and has no duration of residency requirement. Here is the letter sent by De La Fuente’s attorney to the Connecticut Secretary of State, pointing this out.
In the past, there were elections in which the Socialist Workers Party nominees for President and Vice-President were both New York residents. A challenge was once filed to the SWP’s ballot position in New York during one of those years, but the challenge was defeated.
