All Briefs Now Filed in California Case on Residency Requirements for Petitioners

On October 11, the Los Angeles County Libertarian Party filed this rebuttal brief in the 9th circuit in Libertarian Party of Los Angeles County v Bowen, 11-55316. The issue is the California law that does not permit anyone to circulate a candidate petition, if the circulator lives outside of the district. All three briefs have now been filed.

Pennsylvania Web Page Suggests District Presidential Elector Bill Lacks Enough Votes to Pass

A bill, SB 1282, is pending in the Pennsylvania legislature to provide that each U.S. House district should choose its own presidential elector. According to the web page Keepparelevant.com, it appears that the bill is shy of one vote to pass the House. The web page is opposed to the idea. It assumes, logically, that all Democrats in the legislature will oppose the bill. The web page believes that eleven House Republicans won’t vote for the bill either, which would mean it would lack one vote of a majority. See here.

U.S. Court of Appeals Expedites One of the Lawsuits that Attack the Federal Voting Rights Act

The U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. circuit, will hear Shelby County, Alabama v Holder, on January 19, 2012. This is one of the three cases in which various governments or private citizens argue that the pre-clearance parts of the Voting Rights Act are unconstitutional. The other two cases were filed by the state of Arizona, and private individuals in North Carolina. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.

Indiana State Court of Appeals Says Election Results Should Stand, Even if One Candidate Illegally Campaigned at the Polling Place

On October 11, an Indiana State Court of Appeals ruled that the Democratic primary for city council in Muncie on May 3, 2011, should not be held all over again. A lower state court had found that one of the candidates had illegally campaigned at the polls, wearing a campaign shirt. But the State Court of Appeals said that the candidate’s conduct, while “reprehensible”, does not mean that the election results should be set aside and the election run all over again. The appeals court said there is no evidence that the candidate’s campaigning at the polls changed any votes. Here is the decision. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.