The week of July 28-August 1 will probably see several ballot access lawsuits filed. Most likely states are Alabama, California, and Illinois, with possibilities also in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia.
On July 25, the Nevada Supreme Court unanimously upheld the term limits law for state and local government elected officials that had been passed by the voters in 1994 and again in 1996. The Court said that the term limits on state legislators don’t start until the 2010 election. But it said that the limits on local government officials start this year. The legislative decision is Child v Lomax, no. 51802. The local decision is Miller v Burk, no. 51768.
Nevada permits the State Constitution to be amended by initiative, but the voters must pass the measure for two elections in a row. Nevada voters voted for the measure in 1994 and in 1996. The limits were for 12 years, starting with 1996. Certain candidates are now barred from running for re-election in the August 12 primary. Because the ballots have already been printed for that primary, there will be notices at the polling places naming the candidates for local government who are ineligible, warning the voters that certain candidates cannot be re-elected even though their names are on the ballot.
On July 24, a U.S. District Court in New Hampshire ruled that an ordinary voter does not have standing to argue that Senator John McCain is not eligible to be president. Hollander v McCain, 1:08-cv-99. The voter had argued that McCain is not a “natural-born” citizen. Thanks to Jon Roland for this news.
On July 25, the Louisiana State Court of Appeals ruled that a congressional candidate may be kept off the Democratic primary ballot because he signed a candidacy form that contains an untrue statement. Williams v Fahrenholtz, 2008-7459. The candidate is Jimmy Fahrenholtz, running for the U.S. House, 2nd district, in New Orleans.
The form that all candidates must sign in Louisiana says, “I do not owe any outstanding fines, fees or penalties pursuant to the Campaign Finance Disclosure Act, and I acknowledge that I am subject to the provisions of the Campaign Finance Disclosure Act if I am a candidate for any office other than United States Senator, Representative in Congress, or member of a committee of a political party.” Another Louisiana election law says that a person may not run if he or she makes a false certification. Fahrenholtz did owe outstanding fines from his previous runs for Orleans Parish School Board member (he is a member of that board).
Legal precedent is strong that a candidate may not be kept off the ballot for Congress because that candidate had been convicted of a crime. The Louisiana State Court of Appeals decision says that if Fahrenholtz thought the Louisiana law is unconstitutional, he should have mentioned that argument in his trial court memorandum, and he didn’t. Nevertheless, the vote in the State Court of Appeals was 4-4. Since he had also lost in the trial court, he is still off the ballot. He plans to ask the Louisiana Supreme Court to hear his appeal, and he may also go to federal court. Precedents from other jurisdictions that say candidates cannot be stopped from running for Congress, despite having broken campaign laws, include Hamburg v State of Wyoming, 820 P 2d 523, at 533 (1991), and United States v Richmond, 550 F Supp 605 (1982). Thanks to Randall Hayes for this news. For more, including links to the decision, see here.
On July 22, Acting Guam Governor Michael W. Cruz vetoed Bill 287. That bill would have moved Guam’s presidential vote from November to September. The bill’s sponsor had believed that moving the Guam presidential vote to September would get more attention in the United States for the Guam vote. However, Lieutenant Governor Cruz said, “If Guam is going to conduct a straw poll for president, we should vote the same as all other American citizens, which is during the general election.”
