On August 31, the Ohio Libertarian Party filed this brief in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, southern district, 2:13cv-953. It summarizes the most significant findings from the party’s discovery conducted over the last month, discovery which reveals that the hearing officer who removed the party’s gubernatorial candidate from the party’s primary ballot had originally ruled in favor of keeping the candidate on the primary ballot.

The brief also shows that the hearing officer was simultaneously acting as an attorney for the Ohio Attorney General. It also reveals that the man who paid the attorney for the individual who challenged the party’s primary petition is a civil servant for the state. His annual salary is $70,000 and he has no other significant income. Yet, he paid over $100,000 to the attorneys for the challenger. Even if you don’t normally read legal briefs, consider reading this one; it is only 19 pages.

On August 22, supporters of California’s top-two election system asked to file an amicus curiae brief in Milonopoulos v Bowen, central district, 2:14cv-5973. This is a lawsuit filed by a Los Angeles County voter, Theo Milonopoulos, who seeks to restore write-in space on the November ballot for Congress and partisan state office. The amicus will argue that no relief should be granted. The amicus is on behalf of “Californians to Defend the Open Primary.”

It is puzzling that the forces who put the top-two primary into effect in California are fighting an attempt to regain write-in space. Washington state, which also has a top-two system, allows write-ins in the general election. On August 27, Judge David O. Carter ruled that Californians to Defend the Open Primary may file their amicus curiae brief.