California Ballot Access Bill Introduced

Posted on by April 8, 2013
Reply

On April 1, the California Assembly Elections Committee introduced AB 1419, which improves the deadline for a newly-qualifying party to qualify. Current law says a newly-qualifying party must finish the work of getting on the ballot by the first week in January of an election year. The bill would set forth a procedure by which a newly-qualifying party that only wanted to participate in the presidential election could qualify by early July. The bill exists because the old deadline, as least as applied to presidential elections, was held unconstitutional last year.

The Nation Magazine Publishes Article that Publicizes How Many Legislative Races Have Only One Candidate

Posted on by April 8, 2013
6

The Nation has this article by Russell Mokhiber. The article advocates that Nation readers think seriously about running for state legislative seats. To encourage this, the article tells the story of Jonathan Kreiss-Tompkins, a 24-year-old Democrat who was elected to the Alaska legislature in 2012, in a district in which the incumbent had been perceived by observers as someone who could not be defeated. The larger point of Mokhiber’s piece is to emphasize how many legislative districts there are with those characteristics around the U.S., and to encourage activists to run to win. A few of the facts in the article originated with data first published in Ballot Access News.

U.S. District Court Strikes Down One New York City Public Funding Provision

Posted on by April 7, 2013
Reply

On April 4, U.S. District Court Judge Laura Taylor Swain struck down one provision of New York city’s public funding program. Here is the 23-page opinion in Ognibene v Parkes, southern district, 08-cv-1335.

The unconstitutional provision provided that when a publicly funded candidate has an opponent who spends a great deal, then the amount of matching funding that the publicly funding candidate is potentially eligible to receive is four times greater than it would have been otherwise. The lawsuit had been filed in 2008 by a Republican Party candidate for city office. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

Three-Judge District Court Hears Arizona Redistricting Case

Posted on by April 7, 2013
Reply

A trial was held in Harris v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission March 25-29. This is the case brought by Arizona Republicans that argues the Independent Redistricting Commission improperly favored Democrats over Republicans when it drew the legislative district boundaries, following the 2010 census.

The three judges are Richard Clifton, a 9th circuit judge appointed by President George W. Bush; Neil Wake, a U.S. District Court Judge also appointed by George W. Bush; and Roslyn Silver, a President Clinton appointee. Before Wake was a federal judge, he was an Arizona attorney who handled Republican Party redistricting cases after the 2000 census and also after the 1990 census. Here is a story about the trial. The main issue is whether population deviations in the size of the districts are unconstitutionally large, or whether the deviations were for the legitimate purpose of helping to conform the maps to the Voting Rights Act. A side issue is whether the Commission’s procedures were fair.

The post-trial briefs are due April 10. Meanwhile, there is also an Arizona federal case over whether a state violates the U.S. Constitution when it lets redistricting commissions, instead of the legislature itself, draw U.S. House district boundaries. Last summer, the Arizona Redistricting Commission asked Judge Paul G. Rosenblatt to dismiss the case, and a decision could come out at any time. That case is Arizona State Legislature v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 2:12-cv-1211.