On February 9, the Democratic National Committee filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, charging that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is illegally getting help with ballot access from a Super PAC. Here is the filing. UPDATE: see this story, which predicts that the FEC is not likely to take any action.

The Democratic Party says “State law presumes that the candidate and the campaign will be the entities obtaining valid qualifying petitions” to get on the ballot. That is not necessarily true. In 2004, the Michigan Republican Party circulated a petition to put Ralph Nader on the ballot as an independent presidential candidate. Nader did not have anything to do with that petition drive. Democrats sued to invalidate the petition on the grounds that Nader’s campaign did not circulate it, but the Michigan State Court of Appeals ruled that nothing in state law required the presidential candidate’s campaign to be the only entity circulating such a petition. DeeLeeuw v State Board of Canvassers, 688 NW 2d 847.

Also, in 1968, petitions to place Eugene McCarthy on the ballot as an independent were circulated in Arizona, California, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Wisconsin, and McCarthy had nothing to do with those efforts and even opposed them.

In 1960, petitions were circulated to put Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus on the ballot in several states, and Faubus had nothing to do with those efforts. In 1952, petitions were circulated to put General Douglas MacArthur on the ballot in several states, and he had nothing to do with those efforts. Thanks to ElectionLawBlog for the link.

The U.S. Supreme Court oral argument seems to show that the Colorado Supreme Court decision that keeps former President Donald Trump off the ballot will be reversed, perhaps unanimously. Some of the justices, both Democratic and Republican appointees, seem very bothered by the idea that states can make decisions about ballot access in connection with the insurrection clause, because there would be a patchwork effect.

Justice Elena Kagan mentioned that the U.S. Supreme Court decision Anderson v Celebrezze shows that states don’t have unlimited discretion to bar candidates from the ballot, even though Article Two says they can appoint presidential electors any way they wish. It is a good signal for ballot access that the U.S. Supreme Court is thinking about Anderson v Celebrezze, which struck down early petition deadlines for independent presidential candidates.

The attorney for the objectors, Jason C. Murray, reminded the Court three times that there were no ballot access restrictions in place in 1868. It is very good that the Court heard this. It is possible that some members of the Court may not have known that. The attorney explained that there were no government-printed ballots until the 1890’s, which is true and which needs to be better known.

Here’s a story today published by The Washington Post. It mentions the Libertarian Party, which has achieved presidential ballot access in all 50 states and DC in five of the last eight presidential elections, but none of the LP’s possible presidential candidates this year. The LP’s presidential ticket will be selected at its National Convention on Memorial Day weekend at the Washington Hilton Hotel in the District of Columbia.