On October 26, Herb Lux filed this brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th circuit, in his ballot access case, Lux v Rodrigues, 10-1997. This is the case that challenges the Virginia law that makes it illegal for anyone to circulate a petition for U.S. House, outside of the circulator’s home district. The brief is 40 pages and is very strong.
On October 26, at another hearing in Credico v New York State Board of Elections, U.S. District Court Judge Raymond J. Dearie kept his own stay intact. This means Randy Credico will be listed on the ballot only once, even though he is the nominee of two parties, the Libertarian Party and the Anti-Prohibition Party.
Attorneys for the state convincingly argued that it is impossible for all the ballots to be reprinted in time for the November 2 election. Last week Judge Dearie had said that it is highly likely that the state’s discriminatory policy on fusion is unconstitutional. It seems extremely likely he will issue a declaratory judgment in the near future, invalidating the policy that won’t let a candidate nominated by two unqualified parties (each with their own separate line) have his or her name on the ballot in two places, yet does allow this for the nominee of two qualified parties, or even the nominee of one qualified party and one unqualified party.
According to this story, an Alaska state court judge on October 25 refused to decide yet whether it is legal to show voters the list of declared write-in candidates. The judge asked for more substantial briefs by 4:30 p.m. on October 26, and then he will decide on October 27.
On October 26, the Florida State Court of Appeals heard arguments in Ambler v Election Canvassing Board, the case over who should be the Republican nominee for State Senate, 12th district. See this story. The candidate who won the primary, Jim Norman, argued that it is wrong for the lower court to have disenfranchised the primary voters, who chose him. The lower court had removed him as the Republican nominee because the court determined that he filed incomplete and dishonest campaign finance reports.
On October 26, the Ninth Circuit struck down an Arizona law passed in 2004, that requires newly-registering voters to present proof that they are citizens. For people born in the United States, that proof includes a birth certificate or something equivalent. For people born outside the U.S., that means submitting a copy of naturalization documents. The 3-judge panel included retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. The case had been argued more than a year ago. Here is the opinion, including a dissent by Judge Alex Kozinski.
The basis for the opinion is not a constitutional argument, but an argument over how to interpret the federal National Voter Registration Act, which requires the states to use postcard registration forms. Obviously, when a state requires a newly-registering voter to submit a birth certificate or a naturalization certificate, the postcard can’t be mailed the way postcards usually are mailed, because of the bulky attachments.
