Not exact matches
The original
decision in this case, handed down on February 3, 2012, struck down the state's
ballot access law for newly - qualifying parties.
The U.S. District Court Judge
decision missed the main point of the lawsuit, that the unfavorable Georgia
ballot access precedents do not relate to presidential elections.
The September 9 Columbus Dispatch has this story about the September 7
decision that enjoins the Ohio
ballot access law for newly - qualifying parties.
However, Democratic party chair Jay Jacobs argues the process is also democratic (note the lowercase «d») because in the contentious five - way race for Attorney General, the party made a
decision to allow all candidates
access to a primary
ballot instead of letting delegates narrow the field at the convention.
It has been more than 24 hours since U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley enjoined the Ohio
ballot access law for newly - qualifying parties, and no mainstream news media in Ohio (or anywhere else) has yet mentioned the
decision.
The letter explains that the recent 8th circuit
decision in the party's
ballot access case said that once a party completes the 7,000 - signature petition, it need never complete that petition again.
This is an omnibus election law bill that, among other things, purports to give Ohio a
ballot access law for minor parties that complies with the 2006
decision of the 6th circuit in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Blackwell.
It has now been three days since a U.S. District Court in Los Angeles invalidated California's law on how a party gets on the
ballot, and the only news sources that have reported the decision are Rick Hasen's ElectionLawBlog, and Ballot Access News, and the web page of the ACLU of Southern Calif
ballot, and the only news sources that have reported the
decision are Rick Hasen's ElectionLawBlog, and
Ballot Access News, and the web page of the ACLU of Southern Calif
Ballot Access News, and the web page of the ACLU of Southern California.
Once you have gathered the information you need to make a
decision about seeking
ballot access, open a dialogue with all state party members about the possibility of running a
ballot access drive.
The October 2011
decision had said North Dakota needs a primary vote test for minor party candidates, because otherwise the
ballot would become too crowded because there is no other
ballot access barrier.