Florida State Trial Court Strikes Down U.S. House Districting Plan

On Saturday afternoon, September 2, a state court in Florida issued an opinion striking down the state’s U.S. House districting plan. The basis is the Florida Constitution, which says in Article III, section 20, “No plan shall be drawn with the intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbant; and districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process…”.

Here is the decision in Black Voters Matter v Byrd, Leon County, 2022-CA-666. Thanks to ElectionLawBlog for the link.

U.S. District Court Rules That Voters Don’t Have Standing to Challenge Former President Donald Trump’s Ballot Position

On August 31, U.S. District Court Judge Robin Rosenberg, an Obama appointee, issued a six-page order in Caplan v Trump, Florida s.d. 0:23cv-61628. The case had been filed by three voters alleging that Former President Donald Trump should be barred from the Florida 2024 Republican presidential primary, on “insurrection” grounds. The judge ruled that the voters don’t have standing. In support of her conclusion, she cited several cases from the 2008 election, when various voters filed somewhat similar lawsuits to keep former President Barack Obama off the ballot on the grounds that he was not a natural-born citizen. Here is the order.

Five Oregon State Senators Sue Secretary of State Over Directive Banning Them from Running for Re-Election

On August 25, five Oregon State Senators filed a lawsuit in the State Court of Appeals over the Secretary’s recent directive that bars those Senators from running for re-election in 2024. The basis for the Secretary of State’s directive is the new constitutional amendment that does not permit legislators with more than ten unexcused absences to run. The Senators argue that the Secretary is misreading the constitution, and that the exclusion should not be in effect until 2026. Knopp v Griffin-Valade. Here is the filing.

The Senators’ filing also says they expect to file another lawsuit soon that argues the new Oregon constitutional amendment violates the U.S. Constitution. Thanks to Democracy Docket for the link.

No Labels Asks its Supporters to Express Preference for How Presidential Nominee Should be Chosen

On August 30, the No Labels national office e-mailed people on its list, asking them to weigh in on how No Labels should choose a presidential nominee. The choices are: (1) by five to ten highly-respected national leaders of No Labels; (2) by approximately 2,000 delegates who will gather at the No Labels convention in 2024; (3) by tens of thousands of registered No Labels members; (4) by a subset of the 77,000,000 registered voters that No Labels research indicates would be open to voting for the Unity Ticket.

Americans Elect, which was somewhat similar to No Labels, in preparation for the 2012 presidential election, set up a website in which any registered voter in the United States could register as someone who wanted to vote in the Americans Elect selection process. It also set up a system by which candidates could qualify for the vote. But no one received many votes in the Americans Elect “primary”. Among candidates seeking the Americans Elect nomination, former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer got the most, 6,293. His total was so low that Americans Elect decided on May 17, 2012, not to run anyone.

In 1996, the Reform Party had its own national “primary”. People who were registered members of the Reform Party, or who had signed a petition to put the party on the ballot, or who asked for a primary ballot, all were permitted to vote. Ross Perot won with 32,145 votes; his opponent, former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm, received 17,121. It is not known if the leaders of No Labels have familiarized themselves with the 2012 and 1996 examples.