On Friday evening, November 15, Kshama Sawant’s opponent, incumbent Seattle city councilman Richard Conlin, conceded to her. Sawant is the Socialist Alternative candidate in the citywide non-partisan race for city council. See this story.
Reply
Seth Masket, a political scientist who studies political parties, here discusses why the national Democratic and Republican Parties have so much trouble trying to enforce the type of presidential primary calendar they prefer. Masket concludes that depriving state parties of their delegates isn’t much of a threat. Ordinary delegates to Democratic and Republican Parties really have very little power.
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering whether or not to hear Susan B. Anthony List v Driehaus, 13-193, a case over whether Ohio’s law criminalizing making a false statement in a campaign ad violates the First Amendment. The case began after Congressman Stephen Driehaus sued the Susan B. Anthony List because it claimed he voted to force taxpayers to pay for abortions. Driehaus, a Democrat from Cincinnati, had been defeated for re-election in 2010 and his lawsuit was filed after he had lost. His lawsuit depended on the Ohio law against false campaign ads.
Eventually Driehaus dropped his attempt to win damages against the Susan B. Anthony List, but in the meantime the Susan B. Anthony List took the initiative in the lawsuit to argue that the Ohio law violates the First Amendment. The lower courts refused to rule on the Ohio law, so the Susan B. Anthony List asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. The U.S. Supreme Court, showing some interest in the case, then asked the state and also Driehaus to respond. But on November 5, attorneys for Driehaus notified the Court that Driehaus will not submit a response. Therefore, it will be up to the state of Ohio to handle the defense of its law, without any help from Driehaus.
On November 14, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michael Seabright ruled against the Hawaii Democratic Party, in Democratic Party of Hawaii v Nago. This is the case in which the Hawaii Democratic Party sued to obtain a closed primary for itself. The decision says that the Democratic Party might win a future lawsuit, but that such future lawsuit would need to provide evidence that the open primary harms the Democratic Party. The Hawaii Democratic Party had argued that an open primary is facially unconstitutional, which means that it is always unconstitutional, as applied to any party. The decision points out that some Hawaii political parties might want to keep an open primary. The decision is 36 pages.
The decision also points out that when California’s blanket primary was held unconstitutional, and when Idaho’s open primary was held unconstitutional as to the Republican Party, those cases were as applied challenges, and they depended on evidence that the parties who filed the lawsuits were being harmed. The decision says, on page 31, “This court cannot consider the Democratic Party of Hawaii’s challenge without analyzing proof of a burden.”
The Libertarian Party has this compilation of election results for party members who ran for public elective office on November 5, 2013. The compilation also has results for 2013 elections earlier than November 5 at the top. The November 2013 results include fifteen members who were elected, and one who is in a run-off in December.