On October 7, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michael Seabright will hear oral arguments in Democratic Party of Hawaii v Nago, 1:13cv301. The party asks that the open primary, as applied to the Democratic Party, be enjoined and held unconstitutional.
The party’s opening brief says, “The State has consigned the most sensitive and important function of any political party, its nomination of standard bearers and exemplars of its deepest values, to persons who not only have no necessary relationship to the party, and are unknown to the party, but may, and in many cases no doubt do, reject and abjure the values of and membership in the party.”
The brief sets forth possible arguments against the party’s position and attempts to rebut them. To the argument that “the Hawaii Democratic Party is so dominant that the primary is frequently decisive and voters who are not Democrats would be disenfranchised if not allowed to vote in the Democratic primary,” the brief says, “Voters who are uncomfortable with the status quo may feel free to organize an alternative.”
Ironically, the Justice Party, which tried very hard to get on the Hawaii ballot in 2012 and failed, has an ongoing lawsuit against the Hawaii February petition deadline for new parties to get on the ballot. The Justice Party lawsuit is pending before the very same judge who is hearing the Democratic Party’s case.