According to this Deseret article, some Utah Republicans are so upset over a plan by the Republican Party to file a lawsuit over how the party nominates, they will raise money to fight the lawsuit in court. In 2014 the Utah legislature passed a bill that makes it possible for members of a party to petition onto its primary ballot, even if they didn’t show significant support at party caucuses. The Republican Party recently decided to fight the 2014 bill in court.
On December 2, the Arizona state legislature filed this 60-page opening brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona State Legislature v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 13-1314. Article One of the U.S. Constitution says that “the legislature” shall write laws concerning congressional elections, unless congress chooses to write them instead. The issue in this case is whether the language of Article One means that independent redistricting commissions are not permitted to draw U.S. House district boundaries.
The Arizona independent redistricting commission includes of two members appointed by the majority party in the legislature, and two appointed by the second largest party in the legislature (then those four commissioners choose a fifth commissioner). Page 50 says that nowadays, a state legislature “might include a few Greens and Libertarians” and criticizes the Arizona law for not ever making it possible for a third party that might have legislators to have a role in choosing members of the Commission.
The brief of the Redistricting Commission is due January 16, 2015. If the U.S. Supreme Court sides with the legislature, that precedent would probably affect ballot access law in certain states. For instance, Pennsylvania’s petition deadline for independent and minor party candidates was set in 1984 by the State Elections Department, not the legislature, and the Arizona case outcome might upset that Pennsylvania arrangement. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
Illinois is currently one of the few states in which a qualified party can nominate someone after the primary is over, if no one won that party’s nomination in the primary. But an election law bill that is expected to pass has just been amended to delete the ability of parties to nominate someone after the primary is over.
SB 172 was introduced on January 23, 2013, and it passed the Illinois Senate on November 19, 2014. It passed the House Executive Committee on December 1, 2014, but was amended to delete the election code sections on how parties nominate after the primary is over. This bill, if passed, would then be presented to the outgoing Democratic Governor, Pat Quinn, not to incoming Republican Governor-elect Bruce Rauner. It seems that the motivation for the bill is to reduce the number of Republican nominees for the legislature from Chicago. In recent years, the Republican Party in Chicago has had trouble placing candidates on its own primary ballot in many parts of Chicago, so the Republicans tend to nominate candidates after the primary is over. Thanks to Phil Huckelberry for the news.
The Michigan House Elections and Ethics Committee heard testimony on HB 5344 on December 2. Every person who testified was opposed to the bill. At the conclusion of the testimony, the chair of the committee declined to hold a vote on the bill, so it fails to advance. See this story.
On December 2, U.S. Senator Rand Paul formally announced that he will seek re-election to the Senate in 2016. See this story. He has not formally said he is running for President in 2016.
According to a CNN/ORC poll released December 2, for the Republican presidential nomination, Paul is tied for sixth place, behind Mitt Romney, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, and tied with Paul Ryan. Thanks to Darryl Perry for the link to Paul announcement, and to PoliticalWire for the link to the poll.
UPDATE: here is a detailed analysis of Paul’s election law strategy if he runs for president simultaneously with running for re-election to the U.S. Senate.
