The CATO Institute, Reason Foundation, and The Center for Competitive Politics have filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court election case called N.Y. State Bd. of Elections v Lopez Torres. This is the first time either CATO or Reason Foundation has ever filed such a brief in a ballot access case. CATO and the Reason Foundation are well-known libertarian think-tanks. The Center for Competitive Politics was founded by former FEC Commissioner Brad Smith and others, which usually focuses on fighting restrictive campaign finance laws.
The brief, authored by First Amendment specialist Erik S. Jaffe, argues the true “political party rights” position in this case. It advocates that the U.S. Supreme Court strike down the New York state law mandating particular procedures that qualified parties must use to nominate candidates for State Supreme Court Justice. It says, “Whether a private political expressive association (i.e., a political party) chooses to reach its decisions by emulating democratic elections and polling its membership or instead adopts a more hierarchical decision-making process, is of concern only to the association and its members, not the government.”
The brief is useful for making a persuasive argument in favor of autonomy for political parties. The brief is even more useful for exposing the muddy thinking of the Republican National Committee amicus brief. The Republican National Committee brief waxes eloquently in favor of autonomy for political parties. But then it comes out in support of a state law that compels parties to use a very flawed method for choosing delegates to nominating conventions, whether they like it or not.
