On September 25, Emerson College Polls released a poll for the New Jersey gubernatorial race. There are four candidates on the ballot, the nominees of the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, and Socialist Workers Parties. But the poll only asked respondents if they favor the Democrat, the Republican, or “someone else.” Results: Democratic 43.3%; Republican 42.9%; “someone else” 3.0%; undecided or other 10.8%.
Four lawsuits have been filed in Missouri to stop the redistricting bill. See this story. Furthermore, Governor Mike Kehoe still hasn’t even signed the redistricting bill.
On September 24, the town of Newburgh, New York, filed this amicus brief in Louisiana v Callais, 24-109. This is the lawsuit over Section Two of the federal Voting Rights Act, which influences redistricting so as to help racial and ethnic minorities. The town says that if the Section Two is unconstitutional, that should mean that various state laws that mimic Section Two should also be struck down.
The U.S. Supreme Court will put Polelle v Byrd, 25-147, on its October 10 conference. This is the lawsuit in which a Florida independent voter argues that the U.S..Constitution does not allow closed primaries.
SECOND CIRCUIT RULES STATES HAVE VIRTUALLY UNLIMITED POWER TO CENSOR BALLOT LABELS
On August 21, the Second Circuit issued an opinion in Walden v Kosinski, 25-764. This is the case over the state law that says no independent candidate can choose “independent” or “independence” as a ballot label. The plaintiff, Jim Walden, is an independent candidate for Mayor of New York City, and he wanted “Independence” as his label. The Second Circuit had refused to give him injunctive relief on May 2 and said it would explain later. Finally, the explanation has been issued.
The opinion only has one sentence to explain the state interest in the ban. The Court said that without the ban, “that would lead unaffiliated voters to mistakenly believe that this designation was intended to represent all unaffiliated/independent voters, rather than a specific political organization.”
The paternalism behind this sentence is breathtaking. The same logic would justify banning any label that identifies any group.
