The New York U.S. House seat for the 29th district has been vacant since early March 2010. On May 25, a U.S. District Court heard arguments on whether the U.S. Constitution requires the state to call a special election this summer to fill the seat. See this story. The story does not include any quotes from Judge David Larimer to indicate which way he may be leaning. It merely says that the hearing was held and that a written decision will be issued very soon. The case is Fox v Paterson, 10-cv-6240, western district.
New Jersey has procedures for recall of elected officials. Those procedures do not exclude members of Congress. On May 25, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments on whether the U.S. Constitution blocks New Jersey from permitting recall of members of Congress. See this story. The case is Committee to Recall Robert Menendez v Wells, A86-09.
The lower court had ducked the issue. It failed to decide that big issue, but said at least the state should let the circulators have blank petition forms. The procedure is so difficult, requiring approximately 1,300,000 valid signatures for U.S. Senate or any statewide race, that it is fundamentally unfair for the judicial system to not say whether such a petition would be honored if it were completed.
No other court has ever ruled on this interesting question, except for a lower state court in Idaho in 1967 that said the U.S. Constitution does not permit the states to have procedures for recall of members of Congress.
The plaintiffs in McComish v Bennett, the Arizona case over public funding of candidates for state office, have filed this brief with the U.S. Supreme Court. The purpose is to obtain an injunction from the U.S. Supreme Court, stopping payment of public funding this year in Arizona. Justice Anthony Kennedy has already asked the state to respond. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link to the brief. UPDATE: here is the state’s response, filed May 27.
The prestigious blog www.fivethirtyeight.com, has this article, “Might this be a good time for Instant Runoff Voting?” The article is a reaction to the May 22 special congressional election in Hawaii, at which a Republican was elected with less than 40% of the total vote cast. Thanks to Peter Gemma for the link.
The Utah Supreme Court will hear Farley Anderson’s lawsuit over whether electronic signatures are valid, on June 2, at 11 a.m. Anderson is an independent candidate for Governor this year. Utah requires 1,000 signatures. Anderson submitted 960 valid paper signatures and 130 electronic signatures. The counties accepted the electronic signatures as valid, but the state elections office rejected them.
The ACLU will represent Anderson. See this story. Also see here for BAN’s prior coverage of this case, including a link to the web page that was used by voters who wanted to sign the Anderson petition electronically. Utah doesn’t normally have gubernatorial elections in midterm years, but this year’s gubernatorial election is a special election because the Governor elected in 2008 resigned without finishing his term.