The statement of candidacy is the only federally
mandated ballot access requirement for presidential candidates; all other ballot access procedures are mandated at the state level.
However, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that
certain ballot access requirements, such as filing fees and submitting a certain number of valid petition signatures do not constitute additional qualifications and thus few Constitutional restrictions exist as to how harsh ballot access laws can be.
PA has long been home to some of the most unjust and
frustrating ballot access requirements in the nation, requiring Greens and independent candidates to collect many thousands more petition signatures to run for office than their duopoly counterparts.
Georgia is one of only two states (with IL) that does not qualify all of the party nominees in the next election when a candidate of a party meets
vote ballot access requirements;
H.B. 32 would remedy these infringements on voting rights which are are unacceptable in a free state, and align our state's
ballot access requirements with those used by the vast majority of states in the union.
These states have the
easiest ballot access requirements in the nation, and if successful the Reform Party could march into the 2016 general election with at least five ballot lines for the first time since 2004.
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Hawaii.»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in New Jersey.»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Oregon.»
To learn more about
ballot access requirements for political candidates in Oklahoma, see this article.
On December 17, the Illinois Green Party, and its nominee for U.S. House, 2nd district, in the upcoming April 2013 special election, filed a lawsuit against
the ballot access requirements for non-qualified parties and independent candidates.
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Ohio.»
To learn more about
ballot access requirements for political candidates in South Dakota, see this article.
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in New York.»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in North Carolina.»
Unfortunately, the editorial does not tell its readers that Virginia is currently arguing in federal court that if must preserve
its ballot access requirement that no Read more»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Michigan.»
To learn more about
ballot access requirements for political candidates in Delaware, see this article.
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Maryland.»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Massachusetts.»
To learn more about
ballot access requirements for political candidates in Idaho, see this article.
On September 7 the same judge had enjoined enforcement of Ohio's
ballot access requirements for new parties, but since then the Secretary of State has still not put the party on the ballot.
On October 13, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th circuit, upheld North Carolina's
ballot access requirement for independent candidates for U.S. House.
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Virginia.»
For information about filing requirements for presidential candidates, see «
Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Wisconsin.»
Unfortunately, the editorial does not tell its readers that Virginia is currently arguing in federal court that if must preserve
its ballot access requirement that no one can circulate a petition to get someone on the ballot if the circulator doesn't live in the district.