On June 15, a New York Supreme Court Judge in Albany dismissed the lawsuit Redlich v New York State Board of Canvassers, 1623-11, on procedural grounds. This is the lawsuit in which the Libertarian Party argued that its gubernatorial nominee in 2010, Warren Redlich, might very well have received 50,000 votes if the Libertarian Party had not been squeezed into a party column with another party. The lawsuit also argued that not all absentee votes had been counted and if they had been, the party might have been credited with at least 50,000 votes. If the party had received 50,000 votes, it would now be a qualified party. Instead it was credited with 48,386 votes.

The case was dismissed on the grounds that it should have been filed within 30 days of the official canvass of votes.

The New York Libertarian Party has another election lawsuit pending in federal court, on a different issue. That case, Credico v New York State Board of Elections, challenges the state law that says if a candidate is nominated by two unqualified parties, he or she can only be listed once on the ballot. By contrast, if a candidate is nominated by a qualified party and an unqualified party, or by two qualified parties, he or she is listed twice. That case is undergoing discovery.

Another similar case, Conservative Party of New York v New York State Board of Elections, is also pending in federal court. That case challenges the state policy on how to count votes when a voter casts two votes in a single race, for the same person but on two different party lines. The state gives the vote to the party that is higher on the ballot than the other party.

Now that the Arizona Green Party is safely on the ballot for 2012, due to successfully getting a ballot access bill through this year’s legislature, Arizona Greens are now organizing a search for volunteer members who will petition to restore the Green Party’s ballot status in neighbor states New Mexico, Utah, and Nevada. The party hopes to cover the out-of-pocket travel expenses for its volunteers.

On June 20, a New Hampshire state Superior Court Judge said he will hold a bench trial in Blevens v Gardner, the lawsuit filed last year over New Hampshire ballot design. In 2006 the New Hampshire Supreme Court had ruled unanimously in Akins v Secretary of State, 904 A.2d 702, that the state constitution requires that all candidates and all parties have an equal chance for the best position on the general election ballot. The legislature implemented this decision by saying that all party columns should be rotated, so that each column would appear in the best position in part of the state. In 2010, this meant that the Republican column had the best spot in one-third of the state, the Democratic column had the best spot in one-third of the state, and the “Other candidates” column had the best spot in one-third of the state.

However, within the “other candidates” column, Ken Blevens, the 2010 Libertarian nominee for U.S. Senate, always appeared below an independent candidate within the same column. No rotation of names was made within that column. Another issue is whether the Libertarian Party should have had its own party column. New Hampshire is the only state in which it is state policy that unqualified parties can never have their own party column. Briefs will be in by October, and the trial will be in January 2012.