(The following was posted on Ballot Access News by Richard Winger.)
The New Mexico Supreme Court has declined to hear Constitution Party of New Mexico v Duran, 34431. Any Supreme Court is always free to decline to hear a case filed directly with that court. The decision not to hear the case is not a decision on the merits, and the case can be re-filed in a lower state court.
The issue is whether the Secretary of State of New Mexico was correct to remove the Constitution Party from the ballot. The New Mexico Supreme Court never ever learned that the Secretary of State’s brief, asking the Court not to take the case, has important factual errors. The state’s brief told the court that in the past, parties were always removed after just one election if they didn’t meet the vote test. This is not true. Furthermore, the state’s brief did not even quote the complete sentence in section 1-7-2 that describes when a party must be removed from the ballot. The state’s brief did not include the first half of the sentence, which starts out “If two successive general elections are held…”
The New Mexico Green Party is in the same situation as the Constitution Party. Both parties successfully petitioned in 2012, expecting they would get the next two elections, but so far they are both off the ballot for 2014.
The problem is what caused them to want to pay for so many signatures to begin with. I don’t know why you keep saying “I” since as you know I was there both of those times as well. As for the first time, it took Bjornstad going down there in person, and he was able to bring the validation up to the level where they qualified, but they still had to pay for a lot of signatures compared to the number that were required, as opposed to most states. I remember Bjornstad going into some detail about all the picayune reasons some signatures were ruled invalid (ie Bob vs Robert type of crap). I thought you were there but maybe not. And besides the time we (not I) were there, I’ve also read about many other issues alt parties have been having for many years with the NMSOS office.
“paulie December 23, 2013 at 12:29 pm
So you don’t remember a conversation with Bjornstad about why they were going for more than double the requirement where he talked about a lot of problems they have had with the SOS office?”
Yeah, but there were no problems the two times I was there, except for them using the wrong standard to check the signatures the first time they checked them the first time I worked a petition drive there, and even that time, after they checked them using the proper standard for that type of petition the validity was fine.
So you don’t remember a conversation with Bjornstad about why they were going for more than double the requirement where he talked about a lot of problems they have had with the SOS office?
“I’m refering to all the nitpicking rules Bjornstad told us about near the end of the drive in 2010 to explain why they were going for more than the doule the requirement.”
Well, maybe the nitpicking is arbitrary because we did not have any validity problems the two times I worked on petition drives there, except for when they used the qualified party candidate standard to check the unqualified party petition signatures, but once they rechecked them using the proper standard the validity was good.
You’re right, I was talking about non-presidential candidates, which is what it sounded like Cody was talking about when he said “well, at least the CP’ers there can simply run for office under the IAP banner if all else fails.”
I’m refering to all the nitpicking rules Bjornstad told us about near the end of the drive in 2010 to explain why they were going for more than the doule the requirement. It was in a motel on University. Pretty sure you were there, but maybe it was after you left. Also, to various things I’ve read in BAN over the years. Not quite as crazy as the Maryland rules, but close.
“paulie December 22, 2013 at 10:12 pm
Double petition requirement is for all offices. At larger levels the problem is huge number of signatures.”
No, the Presidential ticket is exempt from having to gather petition signatures to get on the ballot once a party has party status, which a minor party can get by doing the minor party ballot access petition.
Any registered voter can sign the petition to qualify a minor party for the ballot, but once a party is qualified for the ballot, only registered voters under the party banner of a ballot qualified party, or registered independents (aka-unenrolled or decline to state a political party) can sign the petitions to place said party’s candidates on the ballot.
“Also, NM is really a pain in how they validate the signatures as well.”
I don’t think that their validating process was bad. There was a mistake made – I don’t know if it was intentional or not – when the New Mexico election officials were validating a Libertarian Party ballot access petition around late 2005-early 2006, in that the first time they checked the signatures, they invalidated the signatures of anyone who was not a registered Libertarian or independent, as if this was a petition for candidates of a qualified party, and not a petition to become a qualified party, so it made the validity on the petition a lot lower than it would have been otherwise. However, after it was found out that out that they used the wrong criteria to check the signatures, they rechecked it using the criteria for unqualified parties, whereas any registered voters could sign the petition, and then it came out that the validity was good and the Libertarian Party was once again a ballot qualified party in New Mexico.
Double petition requirement is for all offices. At larger levels the problem is huge number of signatures.
At lower levels, finding people who live in the correct district ends up meaning having to go door to door, which is a lot harder.
Also, NM is really a pain in how they validate the signatures as well.
Depends on which office though.
Unfortunately, with NM’s double petition requirement after parties qualify, they still have a steep climb to get on the ballot even with a qualified party.
Any Supreme Court is always free to decline to hear a case filed directly with that court. The decision not to hear the case is not a decision […]
Sure…….and Pontius Pilate’s “decision” was NOT a decision.
Well, at least the CP’ers there can simply run for office under the IAP banner if all else fails.
The main parties control the ballot box anyway. They have made my personal ballot access for Arizona Governor 2014 the most difficult of all parties who are ballot qualified. More signatures and less registered voters to choose from while the D’s and R’s can use any voter…. It makes me sick. Plus, the D’s and R’s always get early ballot voting before anyone ever hears of those with true plans and solutions.
New Mexico is allowing it’s cops to beat the Hell out of just about anyone these days. Probably has something to do with the voting booth!