On May 9, the U.S. Supreme Court gave permission to the attorneys for New York state to file their response brief by June 30, in Libertarian Party of New York v State Board of Elections, 22-893. This is the second time the Court has approved the state’s request for more time to respond.

This schedule means that the Court can’t possibly decide whether to hear the case until late September 2023. The issues are the ballot access changes made by the New York legislature in 2020: (1) tripling the number of signatures for a statewide independent candidate or the nominee of an unqualified party, without expanding the six-week petitioning period; (2) raising the vote test for the definition of a qualified party from a group that got 50,000 votes for Governor, to a group that got 2% of the vote for the office at the top of the ticket every two years. That works out to 172,338 votes in the November 2020 election, so the change increased the vote test by three and one-half times. Furthermore, it meant New York became one of only five states that requires a party to run a presidential nominee if it wants to gain or retain qualified status.

On May 5, the Libertarian National Committee filed a lawsuit in federal court against eight Michigan Libertarians. Four of the eight defendants were Libertarian Party nominees in Michigan in 2022: Mary Buzuma was the gubernatorial nominee; Greg Stempfle was the nominee for Secretary of State; David Canny was the nominee for U.S. House, 8th district; and Mike Saliba was the nominee for U.S. House, 10th district. Libertarian National Committee v Saliba, e.d., 2:23cv-155.

The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Judith Levy, an Obama appointee.

The lawsuit says the defendants are violating the Lanham Act, which is the federal law dealing with trademarks. Here is the Complaint. There are two sets of Libertarian Party state officers in Michigan, due to internal dissent. The national Libertarian National Committee believes it can use trademark law to settle an intra-party dispute, something that has never been done before. Thanks to Independent Political Report for the link.

No Labels is publicizing the ABC-Washington Post poll released on May 7 that shows in a two-person race between former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden, Trump would win. No Labels has this to say about the poll:

“Still think our 2024 presidential election insurance policy is a bad idea?
That is an impossible position to maintain after reading the new ABC News/Washington Post poll.
This is one of the most respected surveys in the country – not partisan or slanted, and certainly not pro-Trump.
And yet this new data makes the following clear: Trump is now the clear favorite to win the Republican nomination and beat Joe Biden in November 2024.

In a head-to-head matchup against DONALD TRUMP in 2024:

Trump … 44%
Biden … 38%
Undecided/neither/someone else … 18%

And when undecided respondents are asked who they lean toward, Trump’s lead grows:

Trump … 49%
Biden … 42%
Neither/someone else/ wouldn’t vote … 8%

The critics of our insurance policy (whether well-meaning and misguided or disingenuous and conniving) would have you believe they are sure it will be a Biden-Trump rematch and they know who would win that contest in a two-way race.

If you agree with that point of view, this poll should be deeply unsettling.

I urge you to read the whole survey here, but here are some of the most salient points:

When asked who they would support in 2024, 44 percent of voting-age adults say they would “definitely” or “probably” vote for Trump while 38 percent would definitely or probably vote for Biden. The remaining 18 percent are either undecided or gave another answer….”