Virginia State Board of Elections May Appeal Ruling on Counting 2,000 More Votes

As noted earlier, on October 16, a U.S. District Court ordered Virginia to count approximately 2,000 foreign absentee votes from the November 2008 election. The Board had not previously considered them valid votes, since they arrived in the mail too late, under state law. The Board will meet on October 21 to decide whether to appeal the ruling. If the Board decides not to appeal the ruling, the votes will probably be counted in the next few weeks. If they are counted, the presidential vote totals from November 2008 will surely increase for all the six candidates who were on the Virginia ballot. They were Barack Obama, John McCain, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Cynthia McKinney.

The Board will meet in public in the State Capitol, House Hearing Room One, at 10 a.m. However, the Board may go into executive session during the meeting.

Justice Kennedy Refers Secrecy of Petition Signatures to Full U.S. Supreme Court

On October 20, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy referred Doe v Reed to the full U.S. Supreme Court. Previously Kennedy had been handling the matter himself, because he has jurisdiction over certain motions relating to the 9th circuit. It is not at all surprising Kennedy referred the matter to the full Court, since the Court is in session now. See this Seattle Post-Intelligencer story. The case number in the U.S. Supreme Court is 09A356.

Legal Scholar Edward Foley Points Out Little-Discussed Problems with Electoral College

Edward B. Foley, Director of the Election Law project at Moritz College of Law, has this interesting article about problems with the Electoral College that are not usually discussed. His article focuses on the potential problems when one state’s popular vote is disputed, and the entire presidential election turns on which way that state goes. Thanks to ElectionLawBlog for the link.

North Carolina State Court of Appeals Upholds 2% Petition for New Parties

On October 20, the North Carolina State Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the petition requirement, 2% of the last gubernatorial vote, does not violate the State Constitution. The plaintiffs are the Libertarian and Green Parties. This is the case that was filed in 2005. The 2% requirement for 2010 and 2012 is 85,379 signatures. North Carolina’s requirement is the second most severe in the nation, both on a percentage basis and a raw number basis, when one compares each state’s easier method for getting on the ballot for president. Here is the decision.

The Court also upheld the 2% vote test, which can be met only by a party’s presidential or gubernatorial candidate. It happens that the North Carolina Libertarian Party met this test in 2008, so it is on the ballot for 2010 and 2012 regardless of this court loss.

The dissenting judge wrote, “North Carolina’s 2% statewide requirements for both ballot access and ballot retention place too onerous a burden on the fundamental rights of members of third parties under the State Constitution”, and he also wrote that the law is especially unfair because it forces a new or previously unqualified party to either qualify statewide, or not at all.

The majority erroneously said that Texas’ ballot access law had been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, and that the Texas law also requires a party to qualify statewide or not at all. In fact, Texas has always had procedures for a party that is not qualified statewide to get on the ballot in a single county.

The decision completely fails to mention any of the other issues in the case, including the issue of whether the state should let voters register into parties that are not ballot-qualified. Minor parties have won cases on that issue in Colorado, Oklahoma, New York, New Jersey, and Iowa. It is somewhat likely that the decision will be appealed to the North Carolina State Supreme Court. According to this news story, because the decision was not unanimous, the State Supreme Court will automatically hear the case, if the parties ask for Supreme Court involvement.

5th Circuit Sets Hearing Date for Libertarian Louisiana Case from 2008

The 5th circuit will hear arguments in Libertarian Party v Dardenne, 08-582, on December 3, 2009. Law Professor Mark Brown will argue that the U.S. Constitution says only state legislatures may write laws relating to presidential electors. This is based on the second paragraph of Article II, section 1, of the Constitution. It says, “Each state shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors…”.

This theory was upheld in the various Ohio minor party ballot access cases in 2008, and similar cases are pending in the 3rd circuit against Pennsylvania, and in the 5th circuit against Mississippi. In each of the three cases, state elections officials created their own rules, rules that the legislature had never passed, and these rules were used to keep certain minor party presidential candidates off the ballot. Those candidates were Bob Barr in Louisiana, Brian Moore in Mississippi, and Chuck Baldwin in Pennsylvania.