On September 28, the 4th circuit upheld Maryland’s law, requiring that candidates be listed on primary ballots in alphabetical order. Schaefer v Lamone, 07-1003. The 4th circuit did not write its own opinion, but merely said it agrees with the U.S. District Court decision from 2006. That decision said that the state has a “compelling interest” in “avoiding voter confusion”, and that voter confusion would result if a random method of determining ballot order were used. This is a textbook example of how the courts use “voter confusion” to justify any state restriction that they aren’t inclined to examine closely and analytically. The three 4th circuit judges in this case are M. Blane Michael and William Traxler (Clinton appointees), and Roger Gregory (a Bush Jr. appointee).

On October 3, the New York State Board of Elections said it will ask the federal government to let it use old-fashioned lever mechanical voting machines in 2008. The federal government had required states to replace them by 2006, but had reluctantly permitted New York to use them in 2007. New York state is the only state that still uses them.

New York’s historic combination of mechanical voting machines, combined with a party column or party row ballot format, plus a discriminatory law on which parties get the best columns or rows, has disadvantaged minor political parties and independent candidates for more than 100 years.

Ed Still’s votelaw blog reports that South Carolina Democrats may move their presidential primary from January 29 to January 19, and also that Nevada Democrats may move their caucus from January 19 to January 12. South Carolina and Nevada are two of the states that have an exemption from national Democratic rules on timing. Generally, national Democratic rules forbid delegates to be selected before February, but South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire and Iowa are exempt from the national rule.