Georgia Ballot Access Lawsuit Filed

On May 25, the Green Party and the Constitution Party filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against Georgia’s procedure for placing newly-qualifying parties on the ballot for President. The case is Green Party of Georgia v State of Georgia and Brian Kemp, 1:12-cv-1822, northern district.

Georgia requires a petition of 50,334 valid signatures and requires each sheet to be notarized. No statewide petition for either a newly-qualifying party or a statewide independent candidate has succeeded in Georgia since 2000. In 1985 the 11th circuit ruled in Bergland v Harris that states must be more lenient on ballot access for president than for other office, and that Jenness v Fortson doesn’t necessarily apply to presidential candidate procedures. Georgia is in the 11th circuit.

There is now a constitutional ballot access case underway in all of the states with the worst ballot access procedures, except for Indiana and Texas. Cases are pending in Alabama, California, Georgia, Illinois, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. All of these cases are being handled by attorneys who are not charging for their services. The ballot access movement owes a huge debt of gratitude to these attorneys, who include Dan Johnson of Illinois, David Sapp of the Southern California ACLU, Mike Raffauf of Georgia, Roberta Price and David Urias of New Mexico, Gary Sinawski of New York, Bob Bastress of West Virginia, Jason Huber of North Carolina, Mark Brown of Ohio, Alan Woodruff of Tennessee, and Oliver Hall of Washington, D.C.

There are other constitutional ballot access pending in states not named above. The list above is not intended to be a complete list of such cases, but rather to highlight the cases against the most restrictive states. Six states are responsible for 60% of the total national number of signatures needed to place a new party or independent presidential candidate on the ballot in the entire nation (this calculation uses the easier method to get on the ballot in each state). Progress against those six states will do much to help voters of the entire United States. Those six states are California, Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Georgia, and Indiana.

Ralph Nader Asks for Rehearing in D.C. Court of Appeals, in Bank Account Seizure Case

On May 24, Ralph Nader filed this 12-page petition for rehearing in Nader v Serody, 09-cv-906, in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. This is the case over whether Pennsylvania Democratic challengers are entitled to seize over $50,000 from Nader’s bank accounts in D.C., as payment for court costs in 2004 when Nader’s ballot access petition was found not to have enough valid signatures.

The petition for rehearing is a response to the D.C. Court of Appeals decision two weeks ago that gave the approval for the funds seizure. The petition for rehearing explains that the D.C. court had been wrong two weeks ago when it ruled that Nader had an opportunity to present new evidence in the Pennsylvania courts. The new evidence was that petition challenge had been carried out illegally, by state employees, on state time, using state resources. Even newer evidence is that the attorney for the challengers himself directed this illegal activity.

New Jersey Reform Party Congressional Candidate Withdraws, Endorses LaRouche Democrat

According to this story, Mark Quick, Reform Party candidate for U.S. House in New Jersey’s 5th district, is withdrawing and is endorsing Diane Sare for the same office. Sare is running in the June 5 Democratic primary, and is a supporter of the Lyndon LaRouche movement. UPDATE: on Mary 24, the New Jersey Reform Party issued a press release saying that the Reform Party of New Jersey does not endorse Sare, and disagrees with Quick’s action.

Two Days After California Ballot Access Law for New Parties Enjoined, No General Circulation Media Has Mentioned the Decision

On May 22, as reported here earlier, a U.S. District Court ruled that California’s ballot access law for newly-qualifying parties is probably unconstitutional, and enjoined the state from enforcing the deadline. However, the only media that has reported this news so far is ElectionLawBlog and Ballot Access News.

The decision came in a case in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, and is called California Justice Committee and Constitution Party of California v Bowen.