On October 9, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Young, a Clinton appointee, issued an opinion in Common Cause Indiana v Indiana Secretary of State, sou. dist., 1:12cv-1603. The 19-page opinion strikes down an Indiana law that says in Indianapolis (co-terminous with Marion County), no political party may run candidates for more than half of the seats for Superior Court. Almost all counties in Indiana elect Superior Court judges on a partisan basis. But only in Indianapolis are political parties told they can only run nominees for half the seats.
The opinion says “this process is apparently unique in the Nation”, but limited voting exists in other places in the U.S. It exists in Philadelphia for city council-at-large, in several other Pennsylvania counties for county legislative office, in Washington D.C. for city-council-at-large, and in several Connecticut cities for Board of Education. The system is meant to guarantee that the dominant political party won’t win all the seats.
Normally there are no minor party or independent candidates on the ballot in Indianapolis for Superior Court Judge, but there could be. The opinion seems to be based on the fact that because normally only Republicans and Democrats run candidates, the general election for this office is meaningless, because with Democrats running for half the seats, and Republicans running for half the seats, no candidate loses. Page five of the decision says, “This results in a system whereby the judicial candidates, who run at large, face no competition in the general election.” But that is not necessarily always true. The opinion does note that in 2002 the Libertarian Party had a candidate, so at least in that instance, general election voters did have some choice.
Judge Young stayed his own opinion.
