Another North Carolina Ballot Access Case Gets a Hearing Date

Posted on by July 27, 2010
3

The North Carolina Supreme Court will hear the Libertarian/Green Party ballot access case on September 9 at 9:30 a.m.  The lawsuit, Libertarian Party v State Board of Elections, challenges many North Carolina election laws that relate to minor parties.  The lower courts have tended to treat the case as being solely about the number of signatures needed to get on the ballot.  For 2010, North Carolina requires 85,379 signatures.  That is the highest number of signatures required by any state except California.

However, the case also challenges the state’s refusal to let a party qualify in just one district or county, if it is unable to qualify statewide.  It challenges the state’s refusal to let voters register into unqualified parties.  It challenges the law that says even qualified parties cannot appear on the state income tax checkoff form, unless they have registration of at least 1%.  That latter provision has probably been responsible for the Libertarian Party losing $35,000 in donations that otherwise would have gone to the party.  The Libertarian Party has been ballot-qualified since 2008 but it does not have registration as high as 1%.  This is partly because every time a party goes off the ballot, it loses all its registrants.  Then, when it gets back on, it must start from zero.  On the 2008 tax returns, the state made a mistake and printed the Libertarian Party on the state income tax form anyway, and the party received $39,691.

The Libertarian Party filed the case in 2005.  Later, the Green Party joined the case.  The Green Party has never been on the ballot in North Carolina.

Another North Carolina ballot access case, challenging the number of signatures for an independent candidate for U.S. House, has a hearing in federal court in Charlotte on August 12.  Thanks to Barbara Howe for the news about the State Supreme Court hearing in September.

Michigan Tea Party Releases List of Nominees

Posted on by July 27, 2010
3

On Saturday, the Michigan Tea Party held a nominating convention in Saginaw and nominated 23 candidates.  On July 26, it filed the list with the Secretary of State.  The Secretary of State has still not validated the party’s petition, but the petition is very likely to have enough valid signatures.  In Michigan, partisan ballots contain a party logo.  The logo for the Tea Party contains a coiled rattlesnake, with the words “Don’t Tread on Me” underneath.

The party didn’t nominate anyone for Governor, and Michigan has no U.S. Senate race this year.  The party only nominated two candidates for U.S. House.  One is the First District, which is a very strong Democratic-leaning district.  But the other Tea Party nominee is running in the 7th district.  The vote in that district in 2008 was close between the two major parties.  The Democratic nominee received 157,213 votes, and the Republican received 149,781.

The party nominated four statewide nominees, for Secretary of State, Attorney General, Board of Regents, and State Board of Education.  For the State Senate, it nominated 6 candidates.  Two of them were close in 2006, the last year Michigan voted for State Senate.  In the 13th district the vote had been Republican 57,204, Democratic 56,484.  In the 7th district it had been Republican 59,647, Democratic 56,156.

For state house, the party nominated 8 candidates.  In two of them, in 2008, the vote had been very close between the two major party candidates.  The 43rd district had been Republican 20,219, Democratic 19,373.  The 51st had been Republican 29,921, Democratic 26,587.

The party’s state chair is a former United Auto Workers official who says he has never been a Democrat.  However, he refuses to say who funded the petition drive, and most observers believe that it was funded by someone whose motivation is to help Democratic nominees.  The Tea Party pressure groups in Michigan say they had nothing to do with the petition drive.

The petition requirement this year in Michigan is 38,024.  This is the first petition to place a previously unqualified party on the ballot in Michigan since 2002.  Michigan makes it easy for a ballot-qualified party to remain qualified, so it is extremely likely that the Tea Party will also be on the ballot in 2012.  Parties must poll a number of votes equal to 1% of the winning Secretary of State’s vote total, and it is unheard of for any ballot-qualified party that runs for Board of Regents, or Board of Education, to fail to poll that number of votes for those offices.  The formula usually requires about 20,000 votes.  Voters are more willing to vote for minor party nominees for unimportant statewide office, such as Board of Trustees or Board of Education.  Thanks to Bill Hall for this news.  The other ballot-qualified minor parties in Michigan are Constitution (still called U.S. Taxpayers in that state), Green, Libertarian, and Natural Law.

Final Brief Filed in Libertarian Party New Hampshire Ballot Access Case

Posted on by July 27, 2010
Reply

The Libertarian Party recently filed this response brief in Libertarian Party of New Hampshire v Gardner, in the First Circuit.  The issues are whether states must let unqualified parties use a stand-in presidential candidate on petitions, and whether an unqualified party has any control over use of its name on the ballot.  The case is Libertarian Party of New Hampshire v Gardner, 10-1360.

The Libertarian Party’s first brief in the First Circuit in this case is here.  A link to the state’s brief is inside this blog post.  The next step in the case is for the First Circuit to set a hearing date.

Lawsuit Over Whether Governor Crist Must Return Campaign Contributions Made Before He Left Republican Party Bogged Down in Procedural Dispute

Posted on by July 27, 2010
Reply

On June 22, two Florida Republican donors had brought a lawsuit in state court in Florida, alleging that because Governor Charlie Crist switched from being a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, to being an independent candidate for U.S. Senate, that he must return campaign contributions made by people who object to what he did.

That case, Morton v Crist, had been filed in circuit court in Collier County, 10-3846-ca.  Governor Crist, as the Defendant, had the case moved to federal court, because Crist is running for a federal office, and federal campaign finance laws supercede state campaign finance laws, for candidates for Congress and President.  The federal case is in U.S. District Court, Middle district, Fort Myers, number 2:10-cv-450.

On July 26, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to move the case back to state court.  They argue this is not a campaign finance lawsuit, but a lawsuit over breach of contract.  It will probably take several weeks for the federal court to decide whether to return the case to state court.  See this story.

Another Connecticut Public Funding Dispute Goes to Court

Posted on by July 26, 2010
Reply

Many judges, both federal and state, have been wrestling with the Connecticut public funding law this month.  Besides the constitutional case in federal court that upheld some parts of the law and invalidated other parts, there have been cases over how the law works for joint tickets of Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and also whether candidates should receive extra public funding even though the provisions for extra public funding were recently invalidated by the 2nd circuit.

Now another dispute is in court.  See this story, which explains that one of the Democratic candidates for Comptroller charges that his primary opponent has been improperly awarded public funding.