U.S. Court of Appeals Sets Hearing Date in Postal Sidewalks Petitioning Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, will hold an oral argument on November 9, 2011, in Initiative & Referendum Institute v U.S. Postal Service, 10-5337. This is the case over the constitutionality of the post office’s ban on petitioning on all interior postal sidewalks. The case was filed in 2000.

The U.S. Court of Appeals already ruled in August 2005 that the petitioning ban for postal sidewalks parallel to the street is unconstitutional. At that time, the Appeals court sent the case back to the U.S. District Court to settle the interior sidewalks issue. The lower court delayed the case for years, and then ruled in favor of the postal regulation.

UPDATE: the three judges will be Karen L. Henderson, Janice Rogers Brown, and Thomas B. Griffith. Judge Brown wrote the decision in Boardley v U.S. Department of the Interior, 615 F.3d 508 (2010) which struck down rigid rules on First Amendment activity in national parks. Judge Henderson was on the panel in this same post office lawsuit in 2005, in which the three Appeals judges ruled favorably on postal sidewalks parallel to the street.

California Newspaper Op-Ed Suggests “Top-Two” May be Unconstitutional

The August 16 issue of the Tri-Valley Herald, daily newspaper of eastern Alameda County and nearby parts of Contra Costa County, has this op-ed, suggesting that California’s top-two system violates the U.S. Constitution. The op-ed is authored by Stephen D. Zendejas.

This is virtually the first time that any California newspaper has carried any content that suggests that the constitutionality of Proposition 14, passed by the voters in June 2010, is not assured. Even though the constitutionality of that type of system is pending in the 9th circuit, it appears that no California newspaper has told its readers that the lawsuit is still pending. Even this op-ed does not tell the readers about that specific case, which is called Washington State Republican Party v Washington State Grange.

New Jersey Secretary of State Removes Carl Lewis from Ballot, In Advance of Court Ruling

On August 16, the New Jersey Secretary of State removed Carl Lewis’s name from the roster of candidates for the November 8, 2011 election. He had won the Democratic primary in June for State Senate, district 8. However, the Secretary of State, and a state court, had previously ruled that he does not meet the state constitution’s residency requirement. See this story. This development will probably prompt the U.S. District Court to rule very soon. Lewis is challenging the state constitutional requirement; he argues that it violates the U.S. Constitution.

Carl Lewis is better-known than most people who run for state legislature, because he was a well-known Olympic track star in the past.