Danbury, Connecticut, elects city officers on November 7, 2024. The election is partisan. On October 20 the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled from the bench that the lower court opinion is affirmed in Alves v Giegler. The issue was whether the Independent Party should be on the ballot. One faction of the party had cross-nominated the Republican slate, and the other faction, in a separate convention, had cross-nominated the Democratic slate. The lower court had ruled that the party should have no nominees on the ballot.

The Supreme Court said it will issue a full opinion soon. See this story, which indicates that some of the justices were critical of the party’s bylaws.

The Messenger, an on-line national news source based in Florida, has this story about ballot access challenges for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Cornel West. It notes that according to their FEC campaign filings, Kennedy has not yet spent any money on ballot access, and West has not spent very much.

The story also mentions ballot access activity for President Joe Biden, but does not explain that ballot access hurdles for presidential primary candidates who are discussed in the news media is far, far easier. Except for New York Democratic candidates, none of these candidates need more than 5,000 signatures in any state. And in most states they don’t need any signatures.

The New Yorker has this article about the lawsuit in Arizona, over whether No Labels can block candidates from running in its primary for Congress and state office.

The article has one small factual error. The lawsuit Unity ’08 v FEC, which ruled that parties without any nominees so far do not need to follow federal campaign finance laws that most parties must follow, was won in the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. circuit, not in a U.S. District Court. Thanks to Richard Grayson for the link.