On July 18, New Hampshire SB 98 was signed into law. It provides that the statewide list of registered voters should be provided to qualified political parties, for $25 plus 50 cents per thousand names. The bill does not authorize anyone but qualified parties to obtain the list.

The statewide list of registered voters in fairly new in New Hampshire. Until a few years ago, there was no statewide list, and anyone who wanted such a list had to deal with hundreds of town clerks in each town in the state.

In 1970 the U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed a decision of a 3-judge district court. That decision, Socialist Workers Party v Rockefeller, said that if the government gives a free or inexpensive list of all the registered voters to qualified parties, it must also give the list on the same terms to unqualified parties that are trying to petition themselves or their nominees onto the ballot. The case is at 314 F Supp 984 (1970), affirmed, 400 US 806. The relevant part of the decision is at pages 995-996. This information has been forwarded to the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s office, which is asking the Attorney General for an opinion.

Since November 1996, New Hampshire has not recognized any parties except the Democratic and Republican Parties. It is the only New England state in which no other parties have enjoyed qualified status, at any time during the last ten years.

On July 21, the Colorado Democratic State Central Committee moved the party’s 2008 presidential caucuses from March to February. The Colorado Republican State Central Committee may make the same move; that decision will be made early in August. Thanks to Thomas Jones for this news.

On July 20, the 5th circuit reversed the U.S. District Court and ruled that elected Texas state judges may not be censured for holding a press release and denouncing the actions of a particular lawyer. Jenevein v Willing, 06-50368. The 5th circuit laid stress on the point that Texas state judges are elected in partisan elections.

The Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct had censured Judge Robert Jenevein, but the 5th circuit ordered the Commission to expunge the censure order to the extent that the censure criticized what the judge had said. The judge’s statement was made at a press conference that Judge Jenevein had called. The 5th circuit did said that the Commission on Judicial Conduct was within its rights to censure Judge Jenevein for wearing his judicial robe at the press conference.