The Democratic National Committee has asked 15 particular cities to submit bids to host the party’s 2016 national convention. See this story, which names the 15 cities. The party probably won’t choose the city until the end of 2014 or perhaps the beginning of 2015.
On April 24, a few hours after the oral argument, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that ballot-qualified parties that have been nominating by convention need not get permission from the electorate to continue nominating by convention. Here is the 4-page decision in South Carolina Libertarian Party v South Carolina State Election Commission, 2014-000775.
The decision also says that SB 2 from 2013 is in force. That bill says that parties that nominate by primary can’t switch to convention nominations unless they first ask their primary voters for permission to do that. The validity of that bill was questioned in the lawsuit, because the bill said that it would not take effect unless the U.S. Justice Department pre-cleared it, and yet the U.S. Justice Department did not pre-clear it. The reason the bill was never pre-cleared is that, a few weeks after it was signed into law in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County, Alabama v Holder that the pre-clearance formula is unconstitutional.
The Libertarian Party filed this lawsuit to clear up the ambiguity in the law, and now has the assurance that its convention nominations this year and in future years are valid methods for nominating candidates.
On April 24, Rasmussen released results of its Florida gubernatorial poll. Respondents were asked, “Suppose you had a choice between Republican Rick Scott and Democrat Charlie Crist. If the election were held today, would you vote for Republican Rick Scott or Democrat Charlie Crist?”
Even though respondents were thus discouraged from expressing support for any other candidate, the results are: Crist 45%, Scott 39%, “someone else” 6%, undecided 10%. Adrian Wyllie, a Libertarian, has been campaigning for Governor, and one wonders what the results would have been if the poll had mentioned him. Thanks to PoliticalWire for this news.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission, issued April 2, 2014, has language that could potentially be cited by plaintiffs in constitutional ballot access lawsuits. The opinion says, “There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders. Citizens can exercise that right in a variety of ways: They can run for office themselves, vote, urge others to vote for a particular candidate, volunteer to work on a campaign, and contribute to a candidate’s campaign.”
Here is a blog post by election law expert Bob Bauer, from his blog MoreSoftMoneyHardLaw.com, which talks about the implications of that paragraph. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
On April 23, Mark Fisher won a procedural ruling in his lawsuit against the Massachusetts Republican Party. There will be a trial on June 18. The party had tried to get the case dismissed without the need for a trial.
Massachusetts Republican Party rules say a candidate needs 15% support at the state convention, or he or she cannot petition for a place on the primary ballot. Nothing in state law authorizes the 15% rule, but both federal and state courts in Massachusetts have ruled that if parties want to place additional hurdles to their own primary ballot, they may do so.
The lawsuit involves a dispute as to whether Fisher got 15% support at the March Republican state convention. He does have 15.15% if blank ballots are not included, but only 14.785% if they are included. Roberts Rules of Order say blank ballots should not be counted, and the party rules say that Roberts Rules of Order should apply. See this story for more details. It seems conceivable that the party might wish to give in before the trial starts. Even if Fisher wins the lawsuit, he still needs 10,000 signatures of registered Republicans and/or registered independents. Presumably he is already working on that petition, because the signatures are due May 6.
