Arizona State Court Removes a Republican Legislative Candidate from Ballot, but Appeals Court Puts Him Back On

Posted on by September 18, 2012
4

On September 17, a lower state court in Arizona removed Darin Mitchell from the November ballot. He had won the Republican primary in August for State Representative, 13th district. See this story. Mitchell is appealing to the State Court of Appeals, but Maricopa County wants to start printing its ballots tonight. It is not clear that the Republican Party can replace him. UPDATE: on September 18, a state Appeals Court restored him to the ballot. See this story. The reversal came less than an hour before the ballot-printing process was to start. FURTHER UPDATE: the case has been appealed to the State Supreme Court, but the State Supreme Court left him on. See this story.

In Arizona, voters elect two representatives from each state house district. If Mitchell had remained off the ballot and the Republican Party had not replaced him, then write-in votes would have determined the winner. If Mitchell were off the ballot, there would only be one name on the ballot (Republican Steve Montenegro) but the voters are allowed to choose two representatives. No Democrat, no independent, and no minor party member had filed to run in this district. Anyone may file as a declared write-in candidate up until five days before the election.

Tenth Circuit Upholds Kansas Voter Registration Form, which Doesn’t Let Voters Register into Unqualified Parties

Posted on by September 18, 2012
3

On September 18, the Tenth Circuit upheld the Kansas voter registration form, which won’t let voters register into unqualified parties. The Constitution Party had brought the case in 2010. The Tenth Circuit had already ruled in 1984 that Colorado must let voters register into unqualified parties, if those unqualified parties are active enough to have at least qualified their nominees for the November ballot using the independent candidate petition procedure.

The Kansas voter registration form has a checkbox for all the qualified parties, and for “independent”, but no blank line for a voter to write in the name of an unqualified party. Kansas is one of only two states that makes it physically impossible for voters to register into an unqualified party; the other one is Wyoming.

The new decision says that the Constitution Party doesn’t meet the standards set out in the 1984 decision, because the Constitution Party has never qualified any nominees for the November ballot by petition. However, the Tenth Circuit is mistaken. In 2004, the Constitution Party qualified Michael Peroutka for the November ballot as an independent presidential candidate.

The decision does acknowledge that the Constitution Party was a ballot-qualified party in Kansas in the past, but says that doesn’t count because at the time, the decision says, the party had a different name. But the Tenth Circuit got that wrong also; the party was on the ballot in 2000 as the Constitution Party. The party had petitioned as a party in 1998 under the name Taxpayers Party, and got enough votes in 1998 so that it was automatically on the ballot in 2000. But Kansas had let the party change its name in 1999 from “Taxpayers” to “Constitution.” See footnote 8 in the decision. The Constitution Party went off the ballot in 2002 because it failed the vote test.

Three Political Parties Placed their Presidential Candidate on the Ballot in States with at Least 25% of the Electoral Vote, but Under 50%

Posted on by September 18, 2012
12

By now it is fairly well understood that four presidential candidates will be on the ballot in states containing a majority of the electoral vote: President Obama, Mitt Romney, Gary Johnson, and Jill Stein.

There are also three parties who will be on the ballot for President in states containing at least 25% of the electoral vote, but less than 50%. Virgil Goode’s precise total can’t be known until the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission rules on his petition on September 20, but he will be on in states containing approximately 48% of the electoral vote. The Justice Party will be on the ballot for President in states containing 151 electoral votes, which is 28% of the Electoral College. The Party for Socialism and Liberation will be on in states containing 146 electoral votes, 27% of the Electoral College.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation actually successfully completed more petitions than the Justice Party did. The Party for Socialism and Liberation completed ten petitions, plus qualified in three states in which no petition was needed. The Justice Party completed eight petitions, but placed Rocky Anderson on the ballot in sixteen states because in some states one-state parties that were already ballot-qualified nominated him.

U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit, Bars Independent Candidate for the Ohio Legislature by a Vote of 2-1

Posted on by September 18, 2012
7

On September 14, the 6th Circuit voted 2-1 to keep Greg Jolivette off the ballot. He wants to be an independent candidate for the Ohio State House, 51st district. The decision is Jolivette v Husted, 12-3998. On September 17, Jolivette asked for a rehearing en banc.

Ohio statutes ban “sore losers” but Jolivette did not run in any primary this year, nor did he vote in any primary this year. But the Secretary of State still kept him off the ballot, even though his petition had enough valid signatures, because he had associated with the Republican Party last year. Specifically, he had petitioned to be on the 2012 Republican primary ballot, but had then withdrawn and did not appear on the primary ballot.

Jolivette argued that the Ohio law, if it really should be construed to keep him off the ballot, is too vague. The Sixth Circuit majority said he can’t raise that issue now because he didn’t clearly raise it in the U.S. District Court. The opinion is by Judge Karen Nelson Moore, a Clinton appointee, and also signed by Judge David McKeague, a Bush Jr. appointee. The dissenter is Judge Gilbert Merritt, a Carter appointee. The dissent says the Secretary of State has “indentured” Jolivette to the Republican Party, and that the Secretary of State is always free to try to persuade Jolivette to remain a Republican but the Secretary of State should not be allowed to prevent Jolivette from changing his partisan associations.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sends Photo Voter-ID Case Back to Lower Court

Posted on by September 18, 2012
3

On September 18, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued this opinion in Applewhite v Commonwealth, 71 MAP 2012. This is the case over whether the new law, requiring voters at the polls to show government photo-ID, violates the Pennsylvania Constitution. The decision says that the lower court, which had upheld the law last month, must reconsider the case. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinion says that when the Commonwealth Court upheld the law, the Commonwealth Court was guessing about too many variables concerning exactly how the new law will work. Therefore, the Commonwealth Court is instructed to hear the case again, this time with a better record. The vote was 5-2. The two dissenters would simply have invalidated the law. Thanks to Michael McDonald for the link.