Florida Voter Files Federal Lawsuit to Bar Former President Donald Trump from Ballots

On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618. Here is the Complaint.

The Complaint is misguided. The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate. Thanks to PoliticalWire for this news.

August 2023 Ballot Access News Print Edition

Ballot Access News
August 2023 – Volume 39, Number 3

This issue was printed on yellow paper.


Table of Contents

  1. TEXAS COURT APPROVEES ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
  2. OREGON LEGISLATURE PASSES BILL ASKING VOTERS IF THEY WANT RANKED CHOICE
  3. MAINE BALLOT ACCESS BILL PASSES
  4. U.S. DISTRICT COURT UPHOLDS NEW YORK MAY PETITION DEADLINE
  5. ARIZONA BAN ON PAYING CIRCULATORS IS SOFTENED
  6. U.S. SUPREME COURT SETS CONFERENCE DATE FOR BALLOT ACCESS CASE
  7. TRIAL SET IN GEORGIA REDISTRICTING CASES; MAY HELP BALLOT ACCESS IN 2024
  8. DELAWARE BILL THAT WOULD HAVE HURT BALLOT ACCESS LOSES
  9. LIBERTARIAN TRADEMARK LAWSUIT
  10. OTHER LEGISLATIVE NEWS
  11. WHICH MINOR PARTIES HAVE 2024 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES?
  12. MONTANA PUTS GREEN PARTY BACK ON BALLOT
  13. 2024 PETITIONING
  14. LOWELL WEICKER DIES
  15. BORICUA PARTY QUALIFIES IN FLORIDA
  16. ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.
  17. VIRGINIA LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS
  18. MARK CUBAN WON’T RUN FOR PRESIDENT
  19. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

Republicans Choose Houston for 2028 National Convention

On August 25, the Republican National Committee picked Houston for its 2028 presidential convention. See this story. It is unprecedented in U.S. history for any party to choose a host city for a presidential convention that early. The party says it did so because the best venues are often reserved years in advance. Thanks to PoliticalWire for the link.

California Supreme Court Delivers Setback to Cities That Want At-Large City Council Elections

On August 24, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion in Pico Neighborhood Association v City of Santa Monica, S263972. The decision interprets the California Voting Rights Act to require cities with racially polarized voting to avoid using at-large elections for city council, even if the affected racial or ethnic minority is not big enough to constitute a majority in any proposed district. In this case the plaintiffs, who are Latinos, want district elections, even though they are unable to produce a plan in which Latinos would be a majority in any district. Their proposal has one district that is 30% Latino. The opinion says the California law, which was passed in 2001, guarantees such racial or ethnic minorities a district that enhances their ability to elect a candidate of their choice, even if they wouldn’t have a majority and would need votes from other ethnic groups.

U.S. District Court Enjoins Two Georgia Laws that Affect Voting Process

On August 18, U.S. District Court Judge J. P. Boulee, a Trump appointee, enjoined two Georgia laws that affect the voting process. Sixth District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church v Kemp, n.d., 1:21cv-1284.

Here is the order that enjoins the law that absentee postal ballots must have the voter’s correct date of birth written on the outer envelope. The law also requires the voter’s Georgia drivers license or state ID number on the outer envelope, or the last four digits of the voter’s Social Security number. The ruling says given that requirement, there is no additional need that the accurate birthdate be put on the outer envelope. The basis for the ruling is the “materiality” provision of the 1964 civil rights act. It protects the right to vote, even if the voter makes an error, “if the error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote in such election.”

The other enjoined law prohibits anyone from giving food or drink to a voter standing in line waiting to vote at the polls. The judge enjoined that law as applied to voters who are standing more than 150 feet from the entrance to the polling place, but declined to enjoin the law as applied to voters who are within 150 feet of the polling place. Here is the order on that issue.

The same judge had refused to enjoin these two laws in 2022 because the upcoming 2022 election was too close in time to the court proceeding.

The judge declined to enjoin the law that requires ballot drop boxes to be inside a building instead of outside. Thanks to Democracy Docket for this news.