U.S. District Court in New Jersey Strikes Down One-Year Duration of Residency Requirement for Legislative Candidates in Redistricting Years

On June 26, a U.S. District Court in New Jersey ruled that a one-year duration of residency inside a district violates the U.S. Constitution, as applied to an election that occurs immediately after redistricting. Robertson v Bartels, cv-01-2024. Here is the opinion.

This same court had made a similar ruling in 2002, and had enjoined the state from enforcing the one-year duration of residency requirement. But a few months ago, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the federal court injunction is no longer binding. But, the federal court has just said the injunction is still binding, but only for elections that immediately follow redistricting. Thanks to Justin Levitt of Election Law Blog for the link.

Mexico Presidential Election Results; Winner in Preliminary Count Wins with 38.15% of Total Vote

On July 1, Mexico held presidential and congressional elections. Although Mexico uses proportional representation for the lower chamber of its national legislative body, for President it holds a winner-take-all election with no run-off. The preliminary results are: Institutional Revolutionary Party nominee Enrique Pena Nieto, 18,727,398; Party of the Democratic Revolution, Andrews Manuel Lopez Obrador, 15,535,117; National Action Party, Josefina Vazquez Mota, 12,473,106; New Alliance Party, Gabriel Quadri, 1,129,108. There were also 1,191,067 blank or invalid votes, and 31,660 write-ins.

The New Alliance Party seems to be very much like the Libertarian Party of the United States. Its presidential nominee seemed to favor legalization of at least some illegal drugs, same-sex marriage, fewer restrictions on abortion, and selling 49% of Pemex to private investors. Pemex is the government-owned oil company.

Here is the wiki page about the election, including information on the congressional elections as well. To see an interactive map which shows the vote for president by state, go to www.ife.org.mx. Click on the “Mapa con Resultados Electorales Preliminares.”

There will be recounts in approximately one-third of the precincts, which is normal procedure.

Arizona Top-Two Open Primary Initiative to be Submitted on July 5

On July 5, Arizona advocates of a top-two open primary initiative will submit their petitions to the Secretary of State. They need 259,213 valid signatures and say they have, or will have, about 340,000. The proponents call their initiative the “Open Government/Open Primary” measure, although there is no obvious connection between “open government” and type of primary system. To most people, “open government” means that government decisions are made in public and adhere to a freedom of information principle.

Even the use of “open primary” is misleading. “Open primary” has been defined in political science textbooks since 1907 as a system, pioneered by Wisconsin in 1907, that provide for partisan nominations and partisan primaries, but lets any voter on primary day choose any party’s primary ballot. By contrast, in a top-two system, there are no partisan primary ballots and no party nominees.

Current vocabulary about primary systems is in disarray, however. Current law in Arizona lets independent voters choose any party’s primary ballot on primary day. In 2004, when a top-two open primary initiative was on the ballot in California, Senator John McCain of Arizona endorsed it. He said, “We have an open primary in Arizona and it’s working well.” So, at least in 2004, Senator McCain considered that Arizona already had an open primary. Actually, the primary system Arizona has now is generally referred to in political science books as a “semi-closed” (or, sometimes, “semi-open”) primary.

Two Florida Voters, One an Independent and One a Republican, File Federal Lawsuit to Let them Vote in Democratic Primary for One Particular Office

On June 29, two Florida voters, one a Republican and one an independent, filed a federal lawsuit to gain the ability to vote in the August 2012 Democratic primary for Dade County State’s Attorney, a partisan race. The lawsuit is Mazzilli v Townsley, southern district, 12-cv-22432.

The only candidates who filed to have their names on the primary ballot are two Democrats, incumbent Katherine Fernandez Rundle and Rod Vereen. But, two write-in candidates also filed to run in the general election in this same race. Florida law says that when a partisan race has no candidates except candidates from the same party, then all voters, regardless of their party affiliation, may vote in that primary. But because two write-in candidates filed to run in the general election for this office, the Democratic primary is closed to voters who aren’t registered Democrats.

The lawsuit says that write-in candidates in races like this are generally insincere individuals, who don’t really campaign, and who just file as write-ins in order to keep the primary closed. The lawsuit belittles write-in candidates generally, and says “No write-in has ever won a general election in Florida” and “In Miami-Dade County, only one write-in candidate has received more than .08% of the total Miami-Dade votes in a general election – and that candidate received a grand total of 462 votes.”

Actually, in 1932, Norman Thomas was a write-in candidate for President in Florida, and he got .28% of the statewide vote, although his share of the vote in Dade County isn’t readily available. The brief for the two voters does not give any authority for the statement that no write-in candidate has ever won an election in Florida. Florida permitted write-ins in general elections ever since the government-printed ballot was created in 1895, except during the period 1977-1979. The legislature abolished write-in space in 1977 but in 1979 the State Supreme Court ruled that the State Constitution protects write-in voting, so the legislature had to restore write-ins.

The brief for the two voters does not mention that the same issue in this case was already litigated in 2006-2007, in state court. That case was Jacobson v Martin, 2006 CA 1160, Lake County Circuit Court. In that case, Judge Mark J. Hill said the Florida law is clear that the open primary does not apply if there will be at least two candidates in the general election, and also that a write-in candidate is a candidate. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for news of this case.