On March 21, the California State Appeals Court, 4th district, division one, issued an opinion in Boydston v Padilla, D080921. It is 24 pages long and can be seen here. It says that independent voters have no constitutional right to vote in partisan presidential primaries. Some California parties do permit independent voters to vote in their presidential primaries, but others do not. Each party decides for itself before a presidential primary is held. The plaintiffs argued that independent voters must be permitted to vote in any party’s primary, regardless of that party’s wishes.

Generally the California Democratic Party permits independent voters to vote in its presidential primary, whereas the California Republican Party does not, although it did permit them to do so in 2004.

On March 23, the Idaho legislature passed HB 138, which moves the presidential primary from March to late May.

On March 30, the New Hampshire Election Law Committee appears to have killed SB 133. The Committee had earlier passed it, but seems to have recalled the bill back into the committee, meaning it won’t get a floor vote. It would have moved the date of the non-presidential primary from September to June.

The bill indirectly hurt ballot access, because the deadline for an independent candidate, or the nominee of an unqualified party, to file a declaration of candidacy, and to submit a petition, is tied to the date of the non-presidential primary. The bill would have moved the petition deadline from August to May. And it would have moved the declaration of candidacy deadline from June to March. Even independent presidential candidates must file such declarations, so a March deadline would have severely hampered the ability of a presidential candidate to enter the general election in the spring or summer of the election year.