Maryland Democrats Sue Harford County to Obtain Representation on Redistricting Commission

Posted on by March 17, 2011
3

On March 10, the Democratic Party of Harford County sued the county government, to obtain some seats on the Commission that will redistrict the county’s districts. See this story. The county charter says only parties that polled at least 15% of the vote in the last general election for County Council are entitled to seats on the Commission. The Democrats didn’t run any candidates in four county council districts, and ended up with only 11% of the total votes cast for all seats in the November 2010 election. However, if the vote for president of the county council is excluded, then the Democrats polled 21%.

New York Special U.S. House Election May be a Four-Way Contest

Posted on by March 17, 2011
1

New York holds a special election on May 24, to fill the vacant U.S. House seat, 26th district. Roll Call reports here that the Green Party nominee is likely to be Ian Murphy, who is somewhat famous for impersonating David Koch on a phone call to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. And Jack Davis, formerly a Democratic nominee for U.S. House in this district, and a multi-millionaire, apparently plans to petition onto the ballot under the Tea Party label. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.

Libertarian Party Asks U.S. Supreme Court for Extension of Time to File Cert Petition in Presidential Stand-in Case

Posted on by March 17, 2011
3

On March 17, the Massachusetts Libertarian Party asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an extension of time in which to file a cert petition in Barr v Galvin. Such extensions of time are fairly easy to obtain. Barr v Galvin is the Massachusetts case over whether unqualified parties have a right to use stand-in presidential candidates on their ballot access petitions, given that qualified parties have the right to change their presidential and vice-presidential nominees. For example, in July 1972, the Democratic Party certified Thomas Eagleton as its vice-presidential nominee to election officials in all states, but the following month, the party substituted R. Sargent Shriver. UPDATE: here is the party’s filing.

Also on March 17, The Massachusetts Libertarian Party asked the U.S. District Court who had originally handled the case to certify the question (to a state court) of whether Massachusetts election law already permits presidential stand-ins. Originally, the U.S. District Court had ruled in favor of the party, and had ruled that the apparent ban on presidential stand-ins for unqualified parties violates the Constitution. Later, the First Circuit had reversed the U.S. District Court on the constitutional issue, but had suggested that perhaps the state courts should interpret whether the law really bans stand-ins or not. The law is not clear.

U.S. Supreme Court Sets Conference Date for Nader Hawaii Ballot Access Case

Posted on by March 17, 2011
5

On April 1, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Nader v Nago, 10-728, the Hawaii ballot access case. This is the case, filed in 2004, that challenges the number of signatures for an independent presidential candidate in Hawaii, which is approximately six times as many signatures as needed for an entire new political party with its own primary. Nader argues that Hawaii is discriminating against independent presidential candidates, relative to new political parties, because there can’t be any good reason for requiring so many more signatures for independent presidential candidates.

The state claims the disparity is justified because when a new party gets on the ballot, the presidential candidate of that newly qualifying party still must worry whether that party will nominate him or her or not. Also, Hawaii points out that a party has the burden of holding a national convention. Hawaii requires qualified parties that place a presidential nominee on the ballot to participate in a national presidential convention, but Hawaii has no rules requiring the national convention to be a large gathering. In 2008, when Nader created the Independent Party in Hawaii to take advantage of the easier rules for parties than for independent presidential candidates, that party’s “national convention” was just a handful of people.