In August 2022, Florida recognized the “Coalition with a Purpose Party”. Parties in Florida become ballot-qualified by submitting a list of party officers and bylaws. The party does not seem to have a website, and anyone who has information about this party is urged to leave a comment.
UPDATE: thanks to Jim Riley for finding the party’s website. Here is the Party’s Constitution. It seems to offer no clue about what policy positions the party supports.
On September 23, James R. Adams won a procedural victory in U.S. District Court, in Adams v Carney, 1:20cv-1680. This is the case that challenges the Delaware law that requires most state judges to be registered members of the Democratic or Republican Party. The ruling says he does have standing.
This is the second lawsuit Adams has filed against the Delaware restriction. In the first one, he won in U.S. District Court and in the Third Circuit, but then the U.S. Supreme Court said he lacked standing because he hadn’t actually concretely applied for a judicial post. After that decision, Adams did concretely apply for various judicial appointments, and he has now done so five times. Therefore, his new case is stronger.
Because he already won on the merits in the first case, in the Third Circuit, it seems very likely that he will win his new case soon. Thanks to ElectionLawBlog for this news. Here is the 21-page decision, which is by U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika, a Trump appointee.
Texas Monthly has this article about the Forward Party, by Senior Editor Michael Hardy.
The article says that Ross Perot may have caused the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, and that Jill Stein may have caused the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Exit polls from both elections rebut this idea. Furthermore, in 1992, during the period July through September, when Perot was not a candidate, the polls consistently showed that Clinton was going to defeat President George H. W. Bush. Thanks to Fairvote for the link.
The Second Circuit heard Libertarian Party of New York v New York State Board of Elections, 22-44, on September 6. As of Saturday, September 24, it hasn’t issued any ruling. This is the ballot access case, against the 2020 election law changes that tripled the number of signatures for statewide office, and made the definition of a qualified party far more difficult.
On September 22, the Arkansas Supreme Court placed a statewide initiative concerning marijuana on the ballot. Election officials had acknowledged that it had enough valid signatures, but still had refused to put it on the ballot because they felt the description of the measure was misleading. The Court disagreed and said it isn’t possible for a Ballot Title for an initiative to include everything relevant.
Here is the Opinion in Armstrong v Thurston, cv-22-482. The vote was 5-2.
