On July 10, a state trial court in Nevada issued a ruling from the bench in Nevada Republican Party v State, Carson City 23-0000051-1B. The judge ruled that the Republican Party has no right to stop the state from holding a Republican presidential primary in 2024. The party will appeal.
In 2016, the Arizona Democratic and Libertarian Parties jointly won a similar lawsuit. They didn’t want a presidential primary either, and they prevailed. Thanks to Josh Putnam for this news.
On July 10, proponents of fusion filed the final brief in In Re Malinowski, N.J. Superior Court, App. Div., A-3542-21T2. This is the first court to hear the case. Plaintiffs argue that the ban on letting two parties nominate the same person violates the New Jersey Constitution. The case was filed two years ago and has proceeded slowly. One of the plaintiffs is the Moderate Party of New Jersey. It wanted to jointly nominate Tom Malinowski, who was the Democratic nominee for U.S. House in the Seventh District in 2022.
On July 10, the defendants in Libertarian National Committee v Saliba, Michigan e.d. 5:23cv-11074, filed their brief. This is the lawsuit in which the Libertarian National committee sued the faction of the michigan Libertarian Party that is in disfavor with the national committee.
Here is the brief. The defendants also filed a great deal of evidence.
The Chicago Tribune of July 10 has this op-ed by Bill Redpath, explaining and criticizing the Illinois ballot access laws.
Illinois has had one of the worst sets of ballot access laws for minor parties and independent candidates ever since 1931. And changes in the last forty years have made them worse. There have been some significant improvements in the last 40 years as well, but they were caused by court rulings, not voluntary legislative activity. Unlike most states, the Illinois legislature has not voluntarily made any improvements in over 90 years.
The Hill has this article about efforts by opponents of the No Labels presidential candidate idea to brief Democratic members of Congress about why they are so opposed to the plan. The opponents include the groups Move On and Third Way. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.
There are attempts being made to persuade the public that the No Labels’ presidential plan is illegitimate. For example, see this article at Real Clear Politics, written by Frank Donatelli and Leslie C. Francis. It is titled “The Threat To Our Two-Party Democracy.”
The authors are misusing the definition of “two-party system.” That phrase was coined in 1911 to describe the British party system. It means a system in which two parties are much larger than all the other parties. It doesn’t mean a system that only has two parties.
