On February 17, a U.S. District Magistrate issued a 30-page opinion, upholding New Hampshire’s policy of not allowing stand-ins on presidential petitions, and also upholding New Hampshire’s policy of not having any procedure by which an unqualified party may protect its name from use by independent candidates who choose the party label as a ballot label, regardless of whether the party has nominated that person.
In 2008, the New Hampshire Libertarian Party was not a qualified party. It submitted a petition for Bob Barr for President, and he appeared on the ballot with the “Libertarian” label. Supporters of George Phillies also submitted a petition for President, and he also appeared on the ballot with the “Libertarian” label. The party filed a lawsuit to gain the right to use stand-in presidential candidates, and also to argue that the ballot label “Libertarian” should be reserved for candidates nominated by the state party, but the Magistrate ruled against the party on both issues.
The Magistrate appears not to have read the party’s reply brief of November 6, 2009. The party’s reply brief says on page one, “The post-election declaratory relief that plaintiffs now seek need not include a determination that Phillies should have been removed from the ballot entirely, as defendant suggests. After all, Phillies met the New Hampshire requirements for being listed on the ballot as an independent candidate for president.”
Notwithstanding that, the Magistrate Judge says in his opinion that the Libertarian Party wanted the Secretary of State to remove George Phillies from November 2008 ballot. The decision does not name any of the many precedents that say unqualified parties do have certain rights in election law, including a decision from New Hampshire courts that unqualified parties have a constitutional right to a list of the registered voters. The decision does not mention the four precedents that say unqualified parties have a constitutional right to substitute new nominees for old ones. The decision does not mention the five precedents that voters have a right to register into unqualified parties, or the many decisions that unqualified parties have a right to the list of registered voters, on the same basis as the qualified parties. The Magistrate simply assumes that if a party is not a qualified party, then it enjoys none of the rights that qualified parties enjoy. The Libertarian Party will exercise its right to have the U.S. District Court Judge review the Magistrate’s decision.
Rob, it’s Mr. Winger’s story, not ours.
The only thing *I* am reporting is that Ballot Access News posted this article.
That’s all I have time to do.
If I had to sit and fact-check everything, there would be very few stories on IPR.
Maybe if someone paid me to do this?
As it is, my preference is to have lots of stories and let the comment sections hash out any real or perceived problems.
Wow. Did anybody bother to fact-check this before posting it? It’s the exact opposite of what happened (and chronologically backwards too). The LPNH members first endorsed Phillies and circulated a petition for him, and it was the LNC who then did the end-run around the state party to not only circulate a second petition for Barr, but also file the suit as if they were the LPNH (which they’re very, very lucky they didn’t get in trouble for doing). State parties and the national party are legally separate entities, and when one pretends in court to be the other, it’s potentially very bad for us all. The LNC should have known better.
There shouldn’t be any “blame” here for the LNC losing its lawsuit. The loss was appropriate given their tactic. Hopefully a new LNC won’t make such mistakes.
gp, OK, who SHOULD get the “blame”? What was the proper thing to do, and can it still be done?
Mr. Winger’s description of nomination papers in New Hampshire unfortunately appears to have relied on claims in the LNC lawsuit, claims that are completely false and dishonest.
Please do not blame the fine people of the LPNH for this situation. They did not see the papers before they were filed, even though their name was on them as a plaintiff. In fact, their then-state-chair found out that there was a lawsuit with filed papers only when I called him and ask about the suit had already been filed in their name.