This story in Politico, by Emily Schultheis, reveals that Mitt Romney’s spokesperson Andrea Saul is pointing out that most of Romney’s opponents have failed to file full slates of delegate candidates in Illinois, Ohio, and Tennessee. No mention is made of Ron Paul; presumably Paul, like Romney, did file full slates of delegates in all states in which filing has closed. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for the link.
The Texas Tribune has this interesting article about the problem Texas election administrators may have with the April 3 primary date. Texas does not have settled boundaries for U.S. House districts, or state legislative districts. The U.S. Supreme Court, a 3-judge court in Texas, and a 3-judge court in Washington, D.C., are all involved in lawsuits over these districts. If these three courts do not issue opinions within the next three weeks, the primary might need to be postponed. That would have important implications for ballot access. Texas law does not permit petitioning for minor parties or independent candidates until after the primary.
The Texas Tribune is an on-line newspaper about public policy in Texas, and was founded in 2009. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia has filed this amicus brief in Perry v Judd, the case that challenges Virginia ballot access requirements. The ACLU brief makes a case against the Virginia law that bars out-of-state circulators. The ACLU brief does a good job of explaining that if the state wants to subpoena circulators (in case the state believes a circulator may have committed fraud), there is a method to do that, even if the circulator is not a Virginia resident.
The ACLU brief also mentions the most recent decision striking down a law against out-of-state circulators, the Nebraska decision from 2011 called Citizens in Charge v Gale. The other briefs in this case had not mentioned that precedent. The ACLU brief mentions that the Virginia restriction injures the out-of-state petitioners themselves, and that the law injures voters. Commentary about this issue almost never remembers the rights of petitioners who don’t live in Virginia. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for the link.
On January 10, a 3-judge U.S. District panel in West Virginia refused to stay its own ruling from last week. The ruling last week invalidated the state’s new U.S. House district boundaries. See this story. The state says it will ask for relief from the U.S. Supreme Court. The 3-judge court had invalidated the districts last week because of population inequality among the three districts.
On January 11, the Virginia Republican Party asked permission to present evidence in Perry v Judd, the case over Virginia presidential primary ballot access. The judge promptly granted the party’s request.
When Governor Perry filed the lawsuit, he only complained about the state ban on out-of-state circulators, and at that time the Republican Party of Virginia held itself out as not only neutral, but disinterested in participating in the lawsuit. Then Governor Perry filed an amended complaint, in which he also complained that the Republican Party of Virginia’s procedures for petition-checking were somewhat different in 2012 than they had been in 2008, and that the party should have pre-cleared the new rules with the U.S. Justice Department.
In response, the Virginia Republican Party said that if the new aspect of the complaint were to be considered by the Court, the party wished to present evidence on exactly how it checked petitions in 2012.
