On August 20, a Wisconsin Democratic Party official asked the State Supreme Court to order the Elections Commission to remove Jill Stein from the ballot.  Strange v Wisconsin Election Commission.  The lawsuit argues that the presidential elector candidates of a qualified party can only be chosen by a meeting in the State Capitol of that party’s legislators and its other nominees for the legislature.  The law that mentions that procedure, section 8.18(1), is at ;least 70 years old and has never before been interpreted to mean that is the only way a qualified party may nominate presidential elector candidates.

The Court has ordered all briefs to be filed by August 26, and it will perhaps make a decision that day, because the State Elections Commission wishes to certify the ballot by August 27.

In the past, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled favorably in disputes involving the electoral college and minor party and independent candidates.  In 1964 it ruled that the law did not require an independent presidential candidate to file a separate petition for each candidate for presidential elector, in a case won by the Socialist Workers Party.  State ex rel Boulton v Zimmerman, 130 NW 2d 153.  In 2004, it ruled that Ralph Nader should be on the ballot as an independent even though he didn’t nominate a presidential elector candidate from each U.S. House district.  Nader v Dane County Circuit Court, 04-2559-W.

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers has filed an amicus brief, arguing that the Green Party should not be on the ballot for president this year.

An interpretation that a qualified party cannot run for president unless it has state legislators or candidates for the legislature would be extraordinary.  Precedents in three other states have said that qualified parties cannot be denied the right to nominate for all office.  In Constitution Party of Missouri v St. Louis County, a U.S. District Court in 2016 struck down a county ordinance that only the two largest parties could run for County Commission.  In A Connecticut Party v Kezer, a U.S. District Court struck down a Connecticut law that only the two largest parties could run for Justice of the Peace.  In New Alliance Party v North Carolina State Board of Elections, a U.S. District Court struck down a North Carolina law that new parties couldn’t run for partisan county office.

On August 23, the Illinois State Board of Elections rejected the challenge to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s petition.  He will be the only person on the Illinois ballot, other than Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

On August 23, the Illinois State Supreme Court issued a one-paragraph decision in Collazo v Illinois State Board of Elections.  This is the case over whether a new Illinois ballot access restriction that was passed this year can go into effect this year.  The lower court had ruled that it is unconstitutional for the state to deprive qualified parties of the ability to nominate legislative candidates after the primary is over, and to make the new restriction effective immediately.

The new law is still in place, but it can’t be applied this year.

Here is the one-paragraph order from the Illinois Supreme Court, explaining that precedential decisions need four votes, but in this case neither side got four votes.  That is because two members of the seven-member court had recused themselves.  The court did not say whether the vote was 3-2 in favor of the plaintiffs, or 3-2 in favor of the defendants.  It doesn’t matter, because when the Supreme Court can’t reach a decision, the lower court ruling stands.