Stephen Nodine is a former Mobile County, Alabama, County Commissioner and a former city councilmember. He is currently serving a two-year term for perjury. He has announced that he intends to run for U.S. House in the upcoming special election, First District. See this story. He was originally charged with murder, but he agreed to a plea bargain for perjury and there was no trial. He wants to run in the Republican primary.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1995 in U.S. Term Limits v Thornton that states cannot add to the qualifications to run for Congress or to serve in Congress. This decision was consistent with lower court rulings all throughout the 20th century. On the other hand, the Republican Party has a rule that bars felons or ex-felons from running in a party primary. It seems somewhat likely at this point that the party will attempt to enforce its rule, so if Nodine persists, he will probably file a lawsuit.

In 1992, the Texas Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Lyndon LaRouche could not be barred from running in the Texas Democratic presidential primary, in LaRouche v Hannah, 822 SW 2d 632. Alabama state courts have consistently ruled that political parties can bar candidates from running in primaries if the candidate can be shown objectively to be hostile to the party, or to contradict the party platform.

On June 21, the Ninth Circuit issued this 6-page opinion in Sanders County Republican Party v Fox, 12-35816. This is a Montana decision. The decision re-affirms the panel’s earlier determination that political parties have a right to endorse candidates for judicial office. But the decision also says that the separate issue of whether parties can be banned from contributing to candidates for judicial office was never part of the case, and therefore it reverses the U.S. District Court on that issue.

The ban on political party endorsements, and the ban on political party contributions, are all part of the same code section. The U.S. District Court had struck down the entire code section, but it is now clear that only the endorsement ban is unconstitutional and the issue of contributions has not been adjudicated.