On April 6, U.S. District Court Judge David Nuffer upheld Utah’s severe petition requirements for candidates trying to get on a primary ballot. His 42-page opinion says it doesn’t matter how difficult the requirements are, because they are not mandatory. Candidates are also free to get on a primary ballot if they have substantial support at a party caucus.

The only authority Judge Nuffer cited for his conclusion is a decision of the Second Circuit, upholding Connecticut’s procedures for presidential candidates to get on presidential primary ballot. Connecticut law said candidates discussed in the news media should be on the ballot automatically, and others needed a petition. The Second Circuit agreed that the “discussed in the media” law is vague, but said it doesn’t matter, because candidates not discussed in the media are free to get on the primary ballot with a petition.

Contradicting that is a U.S. Supreme Court opinion from 1969, Moore v Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814. That opinion, on page 818, says, “All procedures used by a State as an integral part of the election process must past muster against the charges of discrimination or of abridgment of the right to vote.” Judge Nuffer did not mention Moore v Ogilvie.

The primary petition requirements in Utah are so onerous, in some cases it would be impossible for more than one Republican to get on the primary ballot by petition, because the law does not let voters sign for more than a single candidate for the same office. In a few legislative districts, the petition requires signatures from over half the eligible signers, so obviously it would be impossible in such a district for two candidates to get on the ballot by petition.

On April 7, the Oklahoma House passed SB 1016. It removes the names of the qualified parties, and the checkboxes for each, from the voter registration form. Instead the voter registration form will simply ask the applicant to fill out the party name on a blank line. The measure is intended to save money. Under the old system, every time a party becomes qualified, or ceased to be qualified, the forms must be reprinted. But under the new policy, such reprinting won’t be needed.

The bill does not have an urgency clause, so it won’t take effect this year.

On April 6, a proposed statewide California initiative was cleared to begin collecting signatures. The measure would require the state to permit registered voters to sign statewide and local initiatives electronically. Proponents of such initiatives would ask the Secretary of State to post their measures on the Secretary of State’s web page. Here is the text.

The measure needs 365,880 valid signatures, and the deadline for collecting them is early October, 2016. If it gets enough signatures, it would be on the ballot in November 2018.