On August 27, former U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman, a leader of the No Labels Party, appeared on Fox News. See this story. He restated the party’s plan to hold a presidential convention in April 2024 in Dallas, Texas.
24
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.
Ballot Access News
August 2023 – Volume 39, Number 3
| This issue was printed on yellow paper. |
Table of Contents
- TEXAS COURT APPROVEES ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
- OREGON LEGISLATURE PASSES BILL ASKING VOTERS IF THEY WANT RANKED CHOICE
- MAINE BALLOT ACCESS BILL PASSES
- U.S. DISTRICT COURT UPHOLDS NEW YORK MAY PETITION DEADLINE
- ARIZONA BAN ON PAYING CIRCULATORS IS SOFTENED
- U.S. SUPREME COURT SETS CONFERENCE DATE FOR BALLOT ACCESS CASE
- TRIAL SET IN GEORGIA REDISTRICTING CASES; MAY HELP BALLOT ACCESS IN 2024
- DELAWARE BILL THAT WOULD HAVE HURT BALLOT ACCESS LOSES
- LIBERTARIAN TRADEMARK LAWSUIT
- OTHER LEGISLATIVE NEWS
- WHICH MINOR PARTIES HAVE 2024 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES?
- MONTANA PUTS GREEN PARTY BACK ON BALLOT
- 2024 PETITIONING
- LOWELL WEICKER DIES
- BORICUA PARTY QUALIFIES IN FLORIDA
- ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.
- VIRGINIA LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS
- MARK CUBAN WON’T RUN FOR PRESIDENT
- SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL
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.
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.