Arizona Green Party is Petitioning for 2010 Ballot

The Arizona Green Party is petitioning to be on the 2010 ballot. It needs 20,449 signatures by March 2010, and already has 4,000 signatures.

An earlier post today, which has been removed, erroneously said the Arizona Green Party was doing a registration drive.

As far as is known, the Arizona and New Mexico Green Parties are the only state Green Parties that are petitioning now for the 2010 election. States in which the Green Party is not now on the ballot, and in which it could theoretically be petitioning for 2010 (even before it has chosen any candidates for 2010), are Alabama, Alaska (a registration drive), Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. The party is in court against the ballot access laws of North Carolina and Tennessee. Theoretically the party could be petitioning in Oklahoma, but since the Oklahoma law is fairly likely to change soon, it would be foolish to be petitioning in Oklahoma now.

U.S. Supreme Court Sets Conference Date for Illinois Ballot Access Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Stevo v Keith, 08-1187, at its May 14 conference. Stevo v Keith challenges Illinois law, which says that in some election years independent candidates for U.S. House need 5,000 signatures, but in other years they need 5% of the last vote cast, which is usually 10,000 or more. Since no independent candidates for U.S. House ever qualified in any of the years in which only 5,000 were required, Stevo asks why the state should ever require more than 5,000.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Voting Rights Act Case

On April 29, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in NAMUDNO v Holder, 08-322. The issue is the constitutionality of section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act, which requires local and state governments in part of the nation to submit election law changes to the U.S. Justice Department, before those changes can go into effect. Here is the AP story about the oral argument. UPDATE: here is the transcript, on the U.S. Supreme Court’s webpage. Thanks to Rick Hasen for that.