Ninth Circuit Sends Case over California Residency Requirement for Circulators to Mediation

Posted on by August 21, 2012
Reply

On August 21, the Ninth Circuit issued an order in Libertarian Party of Los Angeles County v Bowen, the case over California’s residency requirement for petition circulators. The law says they cannot work outside of their home district. California and Pennsylvania are the only states that still have residency requirements within a district for petition circulators, and the Pennsylvania requirement has been declared unconstitutional, at least as applied to general election petitions.

California had argued that because it doesn’t enforce the law, the plaintiffs don’t have standing. Plaintiffs had argued that the Secretary of State’s web page misleads people, because it mentions the requirement and does not say that it isn’t enforced. By contrast, the Secretary of State’s web page also mentions the one-year residency requirement for candidates for the legislature, but an asterisk on the web page says that requirement is not enforced.

Presumably, in mediation, the plaintiffs will ask that the Secretary of State’s web page indicate that the residency requirement for circulators is not enforced, and also that the Secretary of State redesign the petition forms so the circulator is no longer forced to sign a declaration that he or she lives in the district.

North Carolina Green Party May Sue North Carolina Over August Deadline for Filing for Write-in Status for President

Posted on by August 21, 2012
5

Thirty-five states, including North Carolina, provide that a presidential candidate who is not on the ballot may file to have his or her write-ins counted. The vast majority of the deadlines for doing that are in October. North Carolina, somewhat irrationally, says the declaration is due in early August. North Carolina also requires 500 valid signatures to file for declared write-in status. The Green Party is somewhat likely to sue to get more time to file for write-in presidential status. North Carolina is in the 4th circuit, and the 4th circuit is protective of write-in candidates. In 1989 it struck down Maryland’s law that required declared write-in candidates to pay a filing fee of $290. That case is Dixon v Maryland State Administrative Board of Election Laws, 878 F.2d 776. Also in 2000, a U.S. District Court in West Virginia followed the Dixon precedent and struck down the West Virginia law that required write-in candidates to pay filing fees.

Vermont Supreme Court Will Hear Arguments in Ballot Access Case on September 12

Posted on by August 21, 2012
1

The Vermont Supreme Court will hear Trudell v Markowitz, 2011-311, on Wednesday, September 12. This is the case that challenges the independent candidate petition deadline established by the legislature in 2009. The 2009 change moved the deadline from September to June, a drastic change that change has created many problems in the presidential election of 2012. Only one petitioning candidate for President, Peta Lindsay, met that deadline this year. Vermont is tied for having the nation’s earliest independent presidential deadline.

On a related matter, on August 20, Rocky Anderson submitted his presidential petition to the Vermont Secretary of State. The towns have certified more than 1,000 valid signatures, so he will be on the ballot unless the State Supreme Court issues a stay of the opinion in Anderson v State of Vermont. On August 6, the lower state court in that case had given Anderson and the Justice Party two more weeks to complete the petition.