Another Illinois Constitutional Ballot Access Case Filed

On July 30, a second challenge was made to Illinois ballot access law for minor party and independent candidates for U.S. House. Both the earlier federal lawsuit (Stevo v Keith) and the newer state court case argue that Illinois can have no state interest in requiring approximately 10,000 signatures for U.S. House candidates this year, since Illinois requires exactly 5,000 signatures for that office, for both minor parties and independents, in years following redistricting. The new state case is Druck v Illinois State Bd. of Elections, Cook Co., 2008-COEL-8.

Alabama Ballot Access Case Filed

On July 31, an independent candidate for U.S. House filed a lawsuit challenging the number of signatures for that office, in certain districts. Alabama is the only state which requires an independent candidate for U.S. House to obtain more signatures than are required for an independent candidate for president. Alabama requires exactly 5,000 signatures for independent presidential candidates, but this year in the 6th district requires 6,155.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1979 that states may not require more signatures for an independent candidate for an office in just part of the state, than are required for a statewide office. That case was called Illinois State Board of Elections v Socialist Workers Party.

The new Alabama case is called Shugart v Chapman. It doesn’t have a case number yet, since it is being filed by postal mail in U.S. District Court. UPDATE: the case number is 2:08-cv-1382, northern district.

9th Circuit May Release Lemons v Bradbury on August 1

The 9th circuit heard oral argument in Lemons v Bradbury, 08-35209, on July 8, 2008, on an expedited schedule. The case concerns whether a voter has a due process right to have his or her signature counted on a petition. The lawsuit concerns a referendum submitted this year in Oregon. The attorneys for the state had asked the panel to rule on or by August 1. Since the decision hasn’t come down yet, it seems somewhat likely that it will be on August 1. The 9th circuit issues opinions at 10 a.m., Pacific time.