On August 23, the Illinois State Board of Elections rejected the challenge to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s petition. He will be the only person on the Illinois ballot, other than Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
4
On August 23, former President Donald Trump responded to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s endorsement. He thanked Kennedy. Then, Kennedy appeared at a Trump rally in Arizona. See this story.
It will be fascinating to see if the Democratic Party continues its challenges to Kennedy’s ballot position, in the non-swing states. Because Kennedy has endorsed Trump, it seems to follow logically that if Kennedy is removed from various ballots, voters who would have voted for him will instead vote for Teump. Therefore, if Democrats are logical, they will stop trying to remove him.
On August 23, the Illinois State Supreme Court issued a one-paragraph decision in Collazo v Illinois State Board of Elections. This is the case over whether a new Illinois ballot access restriction that was passed this year can go into effect this year. The lower court had ruled that it is unconstitutional for the state to deprive qualified parties of the ability to nominate legislative candidates after the primary is over, and to make the new restriction effective immediately.
The new law is still in place, but it can’t be applied this year.
Here is the one-paragraph order from the Illinois Supreme Court, explaining that precedential decisions need four votes, but in this case neither side got four votes. That is because two members of the seven-member court had recused themselves. The court did not say whether the vote was 3-2 in favor of the plaintiffs, or 3-2 in favor of the defendants. It doesn’t matter, because when the Supreme Court can’t reach a decision, the lower court ruling stands.
The American Independent Party has not replaced Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The previous post was wrong.
On August 23, U.S. District Court Judge Aleta A. Trauger, a Clinton appointee, upheld the Tennessee petition requirement for parties to get on the ballot. The law requires signatures equal to 2.5% of the last gubernatorial vote, which this year is 43,498 signatures. Darnell v Hargett, m.d., 3:23cv-1266.
The decision is only twelve pages and says the law was already upheld a few years ago, in a case brought by the Green and Constitution Parties. Since then, however, the Sixth Circuit has struck down a Michigan petition requirement for statewide independent candidates that was only 30,000 signatures, in Graveline v Benson. The Michigan requirement was less than 1% of the last gubernatorial vote. Tennessee and Michigan are both in the Sixth Circuit, so the Graveline decision should have been binding.
Judge Trauger differentiated the Graveline case by saying that the plaintiff in that case had really tried to get on the ballot and had failed, and had therefore strong evidence that the Michigan law was too difficult. In the current Tennessee Libertarian case, the party did not make an effort to comply with the law.
In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down or remanded cases involving petition requirements even if the plaintiff did not try to petition. That was true for Gus Hall in California in 1972 in Storer v Breown; Eugene McCarthy in 1976 in Texas in McCarthy v Briscoe; and the Socialist Labor Party in Ohio in 1968 in Williams v Rhodes. But the judge did not mention any of those cases.