On January 15, the Sixth Circuit refused to expedite the case Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, 14-3030. This is the lawsuit involving whether minor parties should be on the Ohio 2014 ballot. On January 7, 2014, the U.S. District Court had kept the parties on the ballot, and the state had appealed, and asked for expedited handling.

The Sixth Circuit’s action makes it extremely likely that the four minor parties will be on the 2014 ballot, and will have their own primaries this year. It seems obvious that if the Sixth Circuit disagreed with the U.S. District Court order, it would have expedited the case.

On January 15, a status conference was held in Noble v State, Mercer County Superior Court, c-86-13. This is the lawsuit filed by the Socialist Party to win the ability for voters to register as members of the Socialist Party. At the status conference, the state said it is still deciding whether to give the party what it desires.

In 2001, the New Jersey State Appeals Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for the state to force all voters to register only as Democratic, Republican, or independent. Since then, it has been New Jersey’s policy to also let voters register into unqualified parties that bring lawsuits to gain registration rights. The 2001 case had been won by the Constitution, Green, Libertarian, Natural Law, and Reform Parties. Some years later the Conservative Party filed a similar lawsuit, and it also gained registration rights.

If the state turns down the Socialist Party’s request, then the lawsuit will proceed. There will be another status conference on February 18. Meanwhile, the Natural Law Party, and the Conservative Party, are no longer organized in New Jersey and no longer run candidates. New Jersey elections officials would be wise if they promulgated regulations on how an unqualified party can obtain voter registration rights, and when they should be terminated.

The Seventh Circuit will hear Stone v Board of Election Commissioners, 13-2733, on February 19, Wednesday, at 10 a.m. in Chicago. This is the case that challenges the law requiring candidates for non-partisan citywide office in Chicago to submit 12,500 valid signatures. The plaintiff argues that a candidate running in a major party primary only needs 5,000 signatures to run for statewide office. He also argues that no other large city requires nearly that many signatures to get on the ballot for any city office.