On February 17, Michael Chamness filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, alleging that California’s new election law unconstitutionally discriminates against him and other candidates who are not members of a qualified party. The case is Chamness v Bowen, central district, 2:11-cv-01479. He was a candidate for State Senate in the February 15 special election, and he also intends to be a candidate in the upcoming special U.S. House in the 36th district.

He is a registered member of the Coffee Party. The state will only print “No party preference” next to his name on the ballot. It will neither let him have “My party preference is the Coffee Party”, nor will it let him put “Independent” on the ballot next to his name. By contrast, members of qualified parties have a choice. They can either have “My party preference is the (whatever party the candidate is registered into), or “No party preference.” Here is the brief.

Chamness had attempted to intervene in a somewhat similar state court lawsuit, but the state court did not permit him to intervene in that lawsuit, which is called Field v Bowen and is pending in the State Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

All briefs have now been filed in Ni v Slocum, pending in the California State Court of Appeals in San Francisco, case no. A128721. This is the case over whether electronic signatures are valid on initiative petitions. Amici curiae briefs on behalf of the proponent have been filed by the Asian American Action Fund, Citizens in Charge, the Humane Society of the United States, the National Taxpayers Union, the Electronic Signature and Records Association, Antonio Gonzalez, and Joe Trippi. Trippi is a well-known Democratic Party campaign consultant. Antonio Gonzalez is an attorney. No hearing date has been set yet.

Utah State Senator Benjamin McAdams (D-Salt Lake City) introduced SB 176 on February 4. It makes it possible for two parties to jointly nominate the same candidate. The bill provides that a candidate nominated by two parties would be listed twice on the ballot, so a voter could choose which party label to support. The bill has a hearing at 4 p.m. in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, February 23. Thanks to Rob Latham for this news.