On January 10, the U.S. Supreme Court said that it will hear Susan B. Anthony List v Driehaus, 13-193. The issue is Ohio’s law making it illegal for anyone to make a false statement about a candidate for public office or a ballot measure. The lower courts have repeatedly refused to adjudicate the constitutionality of the law, not only in this case, but in prior cases.

It is possible the U.S. Supreme Court will only determine whether the procedural obstacles to deciding this issue should be set aside. If that happens, there would be no U.S. Supreme Court decision about the constitutionality of the law itself. The lower courts would need to do that. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news.

The U.S. Supreme Court also accepted seven other cases on January 10. Because the Court did not accept Republican Party of Nevada v Miller, 13-442, it is almost certain that the Court will announce on January 13 that it has refused that case. That case concerns Nevada’s law putting “None of these candidates” on the ballot for statewide office, and whether the plaintiffs had standing to challenge it.

On January 9, a U.S. District Court Magistrate denied Michigan’s attempt to dismiss Erard v Ruth Johnson, eastern district, 2:12cv-13627. The case had been filed by a Socialist Party candidate for Congress in 2012, and argues that Michigan’s ballot access laws relating to newly-qualifying parties are unconstitutional. The Report, written by Magistrate Laurie Michelson, is 71 pages long.

The Magistrate kept the case alive because she believes that two claims in the case have merit: (1) Michigan’s petition wording; (2) Michigan’s requirement that circulators of the petition must be Michigan residents. Assuming the U.S. District Court Judge approves the Magistrate’s Report, there would then be further procedings on those two points.

The Magistrate ruled against Erard on his argument that the Michigan ballot access laws are discriminatory. Erard pointed out that the Michigan petition to get on the ballot is currently 32,261 valid signatures, whereas the vote test in recent elections for an old party to remain on has been approximately 16,000 votes. Erard suggested that, therefore, the state can’t require the Socialist Party to submit more than 16,000 or so valid signatures. But the Magistrate said that because all four of the ballot-qualified minor parties in Michigan complied with the existing petition requirement in the past, therefore the Socialist Party is not being discriminated against. The four minor parties now on the ballot are Libertarian, Green, U.S. Taxpayers (Constitution), and Natural Law. The last time any party in Michigan successfully complied with the petition was in 2002. In 2010, the Tea Party tried to get on the Michigan ballot, but failed.

The Michigan petition says, “Petition to Form New Political Party. Warning: a person who knowingly signs petitions to organize more than one new state political party, signs a petition to organize a new state political party more than once, or signs a name other than his or her own is violating the provisions of the Michigan election law.” Erard presented evidence that this stern language deters some people from signing.

The Federal Election Commission has posted a 4-page chart that shows the date of 2014 congressional primaries, and the filing deadlines for candidates running for Congress. It isn’t easy for anyone to prepare a chart on this subject. The FEC chart is very useful, but because it squeezes the deadlines into just one column for candidates running in primaries, and then one column for “independents”, the chart is awkward for explaining minor party candidate deadlines. Thanks to Tony Roza for the link to the chart.