More US Supreme Court News

The post made earlier on November 30 discusses U.S. Supreme Court involvement with ballot access cases, or with cases that have ballot access implications. But there are several other interesting election law cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Initiative & Referendum Institute is hoping to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its case against a Utah law that says ordinary initiatives only need 50% to pass, except that if the initiative deals with hunting, it needs 66.67% to pass. The case is Initiative & Referendum Institute v Herbert, no. 06-534. The state’s response was due November 20 but does not seem to have been received yet.

Congressman Robert Wexler, a Florida Democrat, is hoping to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case that alleges the U.S. Constitution is offended when some counties in Florida use touch-screen vote-counting machines with no paper trail, whereas other counties do have a paper trail. The case is Wexler v Anderson, no. 06-401. Florida elections officials had received permission from the Court to file a late response, due November 20, but then they decided not to file any response.

US Supreme Court Suddenly Receives Many Election Law Cert Petitions

During August and September 2006, five ballot-access-related cases were decided by US Courts of Appeals, and one was decided by a State Supreme Court. Since the losing side is permitted to ask for U.S. Supreme Court review, three months after the lower court decision, now is the time when the three months is running out. And, most of these cases are being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The state of Washington asked for U.S. Supreme Court review in State of Washington v Washington State Republican Party, on November 20, and it is now docketed as 06-730. The Washington Grange filed its own cert petition, no. 06-713.

The state of New York asked for U.S. Supreme Court review on November 29, in New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres. It doesn’t have a docket number yet.

As already noted, on November 20, Ralph Nader asked for U.S. Supreme Court review in Nader v Seroty, no. 06-696.

No one knows yet if the state of Ohio will ask for U.S. Supreme Court review in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Blackwell. The state’s petition would be due on December 6.

The state of Illinois says it will appeal Lee v State Board of Elections to the U.S. Supreme Court, if the 7th circuit won’t give it a rehearing, but that state request for a rehearing is still pending.

The Green, Libertarian and Constitution Parties of Pennsylvania say they will appeal Rogers v Corbett to the U.S. Supreme Court if the 3rd circuit won’t give them a rehearing, but that rehearing request is still pending.

The U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t had an election law case (other than on redistricting or campaign finance) since 2005, when it ruled that Oklahoma did not violate the U.S. Constitution by refusing to let the Libertarian Party invite all registered voters to vote in its primary, in Clingman v Beaver.

Kentucky Minor Party Registration is Small, but Increasing

Only in the last year has Kentucky been keeping a tally of how many voters are registered as members of minor parties. Furthermore, when Kentucky started tallying this information, it excluded the voters who had always been registered in minor parties, and only started counting people who had registered in them after the policy started. Therefore, the numbers have been very small.

Nevertheless, they have risen this year. In May 2006, the numbers were: Libertarian 187, Green 102, Constitution 28, Reform 12, Socialist Workers 0.

Now they are: Libertarian 341, Green 173, Constitution 49, Reform 25, Socialist Workers 15.

Kentucky does this tally for any party that has been on the ballot in the last twenty years and is still in existence.

Romanelli Hearing in Commonwealth Court Set

On December 14, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court will hold a hearing at 1:30 pm. The issue is whether Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli (who had tried to get on the ballot for U.S. Senate) should be required to pay almost $90,000 in court costs. In Pennsylvania, uniquely among the 50 states, when a candidate’s petition is challenged, only state court judges can determine whether the petition has enough valid signatures. The constitutionality of this concept is not being considered by the Commonwealth Court. However, Ralph Nader has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that the whole idea violates the U.S. Constitution.

Green Outpolls Conservative in Ontario By-Election

On November 27, Canada held a special election to fill a vacant seat in Parliament. For the first time, a Green Party nominee placed second, outpolling two parties that regularly elect members to the Canadian Parliament. The election was in London-North-Centre, Ontario Province. The district has a large student population. The University of Western Ontario is in this district.

Seven candidates appeared on the ballot. The results were: Liberal 34.9%; Green 25.9%; Conservative 24.4%; New Democratic 14.1%. The other seven-tenths of 1% was split among the Progressive Canadian Party, the Canadian Action Party, and an independent candidate.

Ballot access in Canada, as well as in Great Britain, is equal for all candidates. A petition of 100 signatures plus a filing fee is required for everyone.