U.S. District Court Won’t Enjoin Arizona Law on How Candidates Get on Primary Ballots

On May 27, U.S. District Court Judge David G. Campbell, a Bush Jr. appointee, refused to enjoin the 2015 Arizona law that sharply increased the number of signatures for a member of a small qualified party to get on his or her party’s primary ballot. Arizona Libertarian Party v Reagan, cv-16-1019.

The sole reason mentioned in the order is that the Libertarian Party didn’t file the case until April 12, 2016, and the primary petitions are due June 1. The order says the party should have filed the case sooner. The decision is eight pages. It mentions that the party had also asked that the number of write-ins needed to win a primary should be enjoined, but says nothing else about that separate issue. The party will ask the judge for relief on that, very soon. Arizona permits write-ins in primaries, but the 2015 bill made the same large increase in the number of write-ins that it made to the primary petitions.

In 1980 the Socialist Workers Party won a federal lawsuit against the number of write-ins needed to win an Arizona primary. That is why the Arizona law still allows members of newly-qualifying parties to win primaries with a very small number of write-ins. The case was Socialist Workers Party of Arizona v Mofford, cv-80-293, handed down July 22, 1980. But the Libertarian Party of Arizona is not a newly-qualifying party.

Bill Kristol May Support Attorney and National Review Writer David French for President

According to this story, Bill Kristol and other anti-Trump Republicans may recruit David French to run for President as an independent. French is an attorney in Tennessee, and a staff writer for National Review. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.

UPDATE: here is a You Tube in which French is interviewed about North Carolina election laws. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link. Further update: on the evening of May 31, Mitt Romney said he respects David French and looks forward to hearing about his decision.

U.S. Supreme Court Sets Conference Date for Samoan Citizenship Lawsuit

On Thursday, June 9, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Tuaua v U.S., 15-981. This is the case on whether the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that persons born in American Samoa be considered citizens, or whether they must go through the naturalization process. The 14th amendment says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” This sentence has always been understood to mean that persons born in the District of Columbia are citizens.