On June 2, the Initiative and Referendum Institute filed its opening brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C., in its case against the postal regulation that bars petitioning on all interior post office sidewalks. This case was filed in 2000. The opening parts of the brief explain why the case is taking so long. The brief highlights the fact that the evidence already submitted overwhelming shows that post office sidewalks have been traditionally used for First Amendment activity.
On June 6, the Republican and Democratic Parties filed their opening briefs in Washington State Republican Party v State, 11-35125. This is the same lawsuit that was originally filed in 2005, against the Washington state top-two system. The major party briefs deal with freedom of association. The Libertarian Party’s brief is now due June 20, and it will focus on the ballot access arguments.
In the federal California case against two particular aspects of the California top-two system, the hearing set last week in U.S. District Court was canceled. Judges cancel oral arguments sometimes when they feel they already know everything they want to know about a case. That case is called Chamness v Bowen and is in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. It is very likely that Judge Otis Wright will uphold both the discriminatory policy on party labels, and the policy that permits write-in space on ballots but says those write-ins can never be counted. Judge Wright had earlier this year refused to issue an injunction against the labels policy.
On June 1, a U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania issued an opinion in Romanelli v DeWeese, middle district, 3:10-cv-1434. The plaintiff, Carl Romanelli, had sued various Democratic state legislators and legislative staff for using state resources to challenge the 2006 statewide Green Party petition. The opinion acknowledges that the Defendants broke state law, but says that there is no remedy in federal court for the problem. Here is the 18-page opinion.
Mark C. Miller, the Green Party nominee in 2010 in the Massachusetts State House race (Berkshire 3rd district) who received 45.02% of the total vote, will run for that same seat in a special election later this year. See this story. In 2010, Miller was in a two-person race with a Democrat. That Democrat has now been nominated for a high position in state government, so it is overwhelmingly likely that the seat will soon be empty and a special election will be held.
UPDATE: see this article about Miller’s upcoming run, which ran in the Berkshire Eagle on June 12.
According to this story, on June 9, the Chinese government ruled that independent candidates are not allowed in elections for county and township office. The article is not too clear, but it seems that “independent candidate” in China means someone who desires to be placed on the ballot, without going through some sort of nomination process that involves being vetted by various groups.
