On August 26, a lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Columbus, Ohio, to expand the area of Columbus State Community College that permits First Amendment activity. Although the plaintiff does not want to circulate a petition, if he wins, the precedent would also expand petitioning rights. The plaintiff wants to leaflet and to speak. The college says none of this activity is permitted, except in two tiny enclaves of the campus that include only 1% of the square area of the campus. The school is a public institution. The case is Anderson v Harrison, southern district, 2:13cv838. Here is the complaint. Thanks to Alliance Alert for this news.
Ballot Access News
August 1, 2013 – Volume 29, Number 3
| This issue was printed on white paper. |
Table of Contents
- NORTH CAROLINA REPEALS STRAIGHT-TICKET DEVICE
- OTHER NORTH CAROLINA CHANGES
- INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE LOSES IN NINTH CIRCUIT
- RESTRICTIVE CALIFORNIA BILL WITHDRAWN
- ARKANSAS CREATES UNCONSTITUTIONAL DEADLINES
- ALABAMA RULING
- OTHER LEGISLATIVE NEWS
- BOOK REVIEW: E PARTY
- 2012 CANDIDATES WITH BALLOT LABEL OF “INDEPENDENT”
- 2012 INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES WITH SYNONYM FOR “INDEPENDENT”
- SIXTH CIRCUIT WON’T RE-HEAR PRESIDENTIAL “SORE LOSER” CASE
- 1787 PARTY ESTABLISHES WEB PAGE
- COFOE ANNUAL MEETING
- KENTUCKY SPECIAL ELECTION
- NORTH DAKOTA LIBERTARIAN PETITION
- SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL
The Los Angeles Times covered the August 27 story announcement by Cindy Sheehan that she will run for Governor of California in 2014. See here.
On August 27, the Colorado Supreme Court struck down a state law that said if voters in a recall election fail to vote on whether the officer should be recalled, then they may not vote on the second half of the ballot. The second half of the ballot asks, in case the recall succeeds, which candidate should replace the recalled officer. The Court did not explain its reasoning, but said it would do so later.
This opinion does not stop the September 10 recall of two State Senators; it just clarifies that ballots are valid even if the voter leaves the top half blank. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.
This article in the Daily Sentinel of Grand Junction, Colorado, says the Constitution Party has suffered from being a qualified major party. The party is a major party because it polled over 10% of the vote for Governor in 2010. However, according to the article, the party would have been better off if it had remained a qualified minor party. Major parties must file many complicated campaign finance reports. The party’s reports have had errors and omissions, or have been late, so the party has been repeatedly fined, and now has a negative bank balance.
Qualified minor parties in Colorado generally nominate by convention and need not petition for ballot access for their nominees.