This article about No Labels says the group’s presidential convention will be April 14, 2023, in Dallas. Some time ago, No Labels had indicated the date would be April 23, so this seems a slight shift. The article has other interesting information about No Labels.
It will make me very happy if future comments are confined to the subject of the blog post, or at least to the general topic of ballot access. In particular, comments about other commenters are not welcome and degrade the site. Thank you very much. There is a lot of drama this year in the struggle for fair ballot access laws. The year 2023 is a very bad year for ballot access, with truly repressive bills in danger of passing in Montana, Texas, and Minnesota. There is plenty to comment on that is relevant to the purpose of this website.
In the New York town of New Windsor, in Orange County, Republican voters who signed a primary petition for a particular Republican candidate got visits from private investigators. See this story. The investigators claimed they were from the Board of Elections, which was not true. Thanks to Joe Burns for the link.
On April 11, the Second Circuit issued an opinion in Gottlieb v Lamont, 22-449. It upholds the Connecticut petition requirements for candidates who seek to get their names on a primary ballot. In Connecticut, only parties that had polled 20% for Governor have primaries; other qualified parties nominate by convention.
The plaintiffs challenged the requirements for legislative candidates, a petition of 5% of the number of registered party members, to be collected in only 14 days. Most Republicans and Democrats who get on primary ballots in Connecticut do not need to complete this petition, because candidates also get on the primary ballot if they get the support of at least 15% of the delegates to a party meeting. In the past, Connecticut didn’t even have procedures for candidates to get on a primary ballot if they lacked 15% support at a meeting, so the tradition of candidates petitioning in primaries is not grounded in Connecticut history. The only reason Connecticut has a petition alternative for primaries is that in 2003, a U.S. District Court issued an opinion forcing the state to add such procedures. That case was Campbell v Bysiewicz. The state did not appeal that case, so the primary petition procedures were added in 2003, but they were very severe. The primary petitions for statewide office require 2% of the number of registered voters in that party, to be collected in six weeks. The statewide primary petition requirements were not at issue in the Gottlieb case.
The Gottlieb opinion is not signed, and will not be reported. It was before Judge Robert D. Sack, a Clinton appointee; Judge Susan L. Carney, an Obama appointee, and Joseph Bianco, a Trump appointee. The opinion says because some candidates have managed to complete primary petitions, therefore it isn’t too difficult. It says that in 2018, eighteen primary petitions succeeded. This is not many, because Connecticut has 186 legislative races every two years.
On April 13, the California Senate passed SB 437. It requires qualified parties to notify the state of the identity of their presidential and vice-presidential nominees by 75 days before the general election. Depending on the calendar, this would be between August 19 and August 25 of the election year. The bill says if the party hasn’t yet chosen its presidential nominee, it must identify the “apparent” nominees.
At least one of the two major parties held a presidential nominating convention on a date after the bill’s deadline, in 1996, 2004, 2008, and 2012. In 2008 and 2012, both major party national conventions were later than the bill’s deadline. But it is generally possible to know who the conventions will nominate, before the conventions actually meet.
Current California law does not set a deadline for qualified parties to identify their presidential and vice-presidential nominees.
