On August 30, a Superior Court Judge in Phoenix will hear two cases on whether the top-two open primary has enough valid signatures to be on the ballot. One case was filed against election officials by proponents of the initiative. The other case was filed against election officials by opponents. The first case says the petition really has more valid signatures than election officials found. The second case says that election officials should not have counted petitions circulated by ex-felons. See this story.

The case filed by proponents is Open Government Committee v Bennett, cv2012-013089. The case filed by opponents is Save Our Vote v Bennett, cv2012-013094. They are both before Judge John Raya.

On August 27, a U.S. District Court in Ohio ruled that certain types of provisional votes must be counted, even though they are invalid under state law. They are the kinds of provision ballots that were cast in the wrong precinct, but the right building, because of errors made by election officials. Rick Hasen explains the importance of the case and links to the decision here.

On August 27, the groups and individuals who challenged the ban on obtaining signatures on post office interior sidewalks asked the U.S. Court of Appeals to re-hear their case. The D.C. Circuit had upheld the ban on July 13. The case is Initiative & Referendum Institute v U.S. Postal Service. The existing postal regulations permit voter registration card tables on such sidewalks. Also the existing regulations permit petitioners to stand on interior postal sidewalks and ask for signatures, but if the passer-by wants to sign, then the act of signing must be off the sidewalk.

Here is the request for rehearing. The text is 15 pages. It’s an interesting brief.