On October 1, the North Dakota Libertarian Party filed a notice of appeal to the 8th circuit, in Libertarian Party of North Dakota v Jaeger.  The issue is a state law that does not permit any political party to run a candidate for the legislature, with the party label, unless approximately 10% to 15% of the voters choose to vote in that party’s primary.  North Dakota has open primaries; any voter can choose any party’s primary ballot.  It is wildly unlikely that any new or minor party would ever be able to attract between 10% and 15% of all the primary voters to vote in its primaries.  Traditionally, very few voters in open primary states choose to vote in a minor party primary.  Even the Vermont Progressive Party’s primary this year attracted fewer than 600 voters, yet the Progressive Party regularly elects six or so members of the state legislature.

The Illinois First District Appellate Court has received briefs from both sides  in Constitution Party v State Board of Elections, 1-10-2813.  The issue is whether the statewide candidates of the Constitution Party will be on the ballot.  Under the ruling of the lower court, the party has 24,920 valid signatures, and it needs 25,000.

One issue in the appeal is whether to count the 82 otherwise valid signatures collected by Rosanna Pulido.  The lower court did not count them because Pulido was a candidate for U.S. House in the February 2010 Republican primary.  The law is ambiguous on whether someone who was involved with a primary petition is free to circulate for a different office, for an unqualified party, in the general election.  In the past, the law prohibited individuals from circulating both types of petition, but the law has changed since then.  Also, earlier this year another State Appeals Court ruled that Steven Rauschenberger could be a Republican nominee for State Senate this year even though he had voted in a Democratic primary in 2009.

Another issue in the case is whether to re-validate 94 signatures that the lower court did not validate, given serious due process problems that made it difficult for the Constitution Party to show that those 94 signatures are valid.  To read briefs in the case, see a special web page set up by the Constitution Party, http://objections.runrandyrun.com.  See here for the party’s appeal brief.  Thanks to Russell Van Zandt for this news.