| Page 4371

Maine Secretary of State Agrees Not to Print Americans Elect Primary Ballots

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Richard WingerMay 21, 2012

Even though Americans Elect became a fully-qualified party in Maine in January 2012, and state law says all qualified parties nominate by primary, the Maine Secretary of State has complied with Americans Elect’s request that no primary ballots be printed for Americans Elect. The Americans Elect request was made back on February 1, 2012, and had nothing to do with last week’s decision by Americans Elect not to nominate anyone for President and Vice-President.

Maine permits write-ins in primaries, so in theory, if Americans Elect primary ballots had been printed up, individuals could have sought the Americans Elect nomination for various partisan offices. The Maine primary is June 12.

The Secretaries of State of California and North Dakota had previously issued similar rulings.

U.S. District Court Judge Cancels Oral Argument in Constitution Party/Justice Party Lawsuit over January Deadline for Parties to Qualify

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Richard WingerMay 21, 2012

U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson has canceled the oral argument in California Justice Committee and Constitution Party of California. It had been set for 1:30 p.m. in Los Angeles on May 21. The judge indicated he will rule on the written briefs.

New Bill in Congress to Help Overseas Absentee Voters

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Richard WingerMay 21, 2012

U.S. House member Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) has introduced HB 5828, to provide that overseas absentee voters (including military overseas absentee voters) would only need to request an absentee ballot once, in any given election year. Existing law requires the voters to make separate requests for primary ballots and the general election ballot. The issue is especially acute for New York voters, because New York is holding three partisan primaries this year plus the general election. New York voters went to the polls in April for the presidential primary, in June for the congressional primary, and in September for the legislative and local primary.

Maryland’s Highest State Court Construes Law on Petition-Checking in an Unfavorable Manner

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Richard WingerMay 21, 2012

On May 21, the highest state court in Maryland, the State Court of Appeals, interpreted Maryland election law to mean that signatures on petitions are invalid if there is no exact match in the name on the voter registration record, and the name on the petition. As a result, the Libertarian Party and the Green Party do not have enough valid signatures on their petitions for 2012, and must now get more before the August 6 deadline. Here is the 36-page unanimous decision, which is called Maryland State Board of Elections v Libertarian Party of Maryland, 11-79. UPDATE: see this article.

The Court also construed the law to mean that if a voter signs the petition the first time using a nickname or other variant of the name that doesn’t match, that voter is not then free to re-sign another sheet of the petition with the precisely correct name.

Maryland requires 10,000 signatures for ballot access for new parties. The Libertarian Party is now deemed to have only 6,583 valid signatures, and the Green Party now has only 5,919 valid signatures.

The Court took pains to say that it is not deciding whether the strict standard is constitutional or not. It says it cannot decide that question because the case was not presented to it as a constitutional question. Reading between the lines, it is overwhelmingly likely that the Court decided this case in this hostile manner because the judges are not sympathetic to various referenda petitions being circulated. The judges probably believe that the Libertarian and Green Parties, and other minor parties, will be able to qualify despite the ruling, because the number of valid signatures they still need is a small number. The real impact of this decision will be to make it virtually impossible for referendum petitions to succeed, including one that would put same-sex marriage to a popular vote. Referendum petitions covering statewide issues need approximately 60,000 valid signatures.

Pennsylvania Minor Parties File New Lawsuit Against Petition-Checking Procedure that Threatens Petitioners with Huge Court Costs if Petition is Insufficient

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Richard WingerMay 21, 2012

On May 17, the Pennsylvania Constitution, Green, and Libertarian Parties filed a new federal lawsuit against the Pennsylvania system for checking petitions. The system, ever since 2004, has put petitioning candidates in jeopardy of paying court costs of up to $100,000 if their petitions are found to lack enough valid signatures. The case is in the eastern district, in Philadelphia. Here is the complaint. The first affidavit also starts at that link. Here is are the following pages of that affidavit, plus some other affidavits. And here is the last set of affidavits.

The case, Constitution Party of Pennsylvania v Aichele, 5:12-cv-2726, was assigned to Judge Lawrence Stengel, the same U.S. District Court judge who ruled in a similar case in 2009 that the plaintiff parties lack standing. This time, the complaint has been designed to withstand that peril.

Pennsylvania and Alabama are the only states in which no statewide minor party or independent candidates appeared on the ballot in any non-presidential election year, during the period 2005 to the present. All the statewide minor party petitions filed in 2010 in Pennsylvania were withdrawn after major party leaders threatened to challenge those petitions. In 2006, the only statewide petition submitted by a minor party or independent candidate was the Green Party petition, and the party’s U.S. Senate nominee, Carl Romanelli, was ordered to pay over $80,000 when that petition was found lacking in enough valid signatures. The only statewide minor party or independent petitions that have succeeded in Pennsylvania in the last seven years are the 2008 Libertarian petition and the 2008 independent Ralph Nader petition.