On February 12, attorneys representing the Alabama Secretary of State filed this 15-page brief, in defense of the state’s petition requirement for newly-qualifying parties. The lawsuit is Stein v Chapman, middle district, 2:12cv-442, and was filed by the Constitution, Green, and Libertarian Parties. It challenges the March petition deadline, especially in conjunction with the severe petition requirement of 3% of the last gubernatorial vote.
The state can’t come up with any practical, election-administration reason for the March deadline. It attempts to do so on pages 12-13, when it implies that it won’t have time to validate the petitions if the deadline is later than March. But it then undercuts its own argument by admitting that it did manage to cope with checking petitions for the three independent presidential petitions it received, even though they weren’t due until early September. The state says it used random sampling to check those petitions, which leaves the obvious question, why can’t the state use random sampling to sample petitions to establish new parties?
The state also continues to insist that minor parties are not injured when they are denied a party label, and cites to a few pages from Jill Stein’s deposition, in which she admits that she is free to put up campaign signs and billboards that inform the voters that she is the Green Party nominee, not an independent candidate. But there is nothing in the state’s brief to explain the state interest in depriving minor party nominees of their party label. The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently said that states have an interest in informing voters, and denying appropriate party labels injures voter information. Here is the link to the pages of the Stein deposition that the state submitted, along with its brief.
