Pennsylvania Supreme Court Again Says Candidates Must Pay to Have Themselves Removed from Ballot
November 21st, 2007On November 21, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that Carl Romanelli and his attorney, Larry Otter, must pay close to $100,000, for the costs associated with removing Romanelli from the November 2006 ballot. Again, the Court ignored the constitutional issue. Ralph Nader had been the first candidate to be required to pay such costs, when he was removed from the ballot in 2004.
The Supreme Court did tell the lower court to re-issue its order, and to include an assessment of costs by category, and a rationale for including each category. It is conceivable that when this is done, the amount might change.
Other courts have ruled that if a state requires a party to nominate by primary, the state must pay the costs of holding that primary. Other courts have ruled that it is unconstitutional to force petitioning candidates and parties to pay the costs of checking their signatures. These decisions stem from the U.S. Supreme Court Harper v Virginia State Board of Elections decision of 1966, invalidating poll taxes.
November 21st, 2007 at 6:35 pm
It’s interesting that the state has always paid the costs of holding primaries in Virginia, despite the fact that the parties have several other nominating options.
November 22nd, 2007 at 6:49 am
Seems that elections are turning into money-making opportunities for a government headed for bankruptcy.
November 22nd, 2007 at 9:51 am
Madness…absolute madness! PA wins the award for the most corrupt state, beating out Oregon (where Bill Bradbury invented new laws to kick Nader off the ballot), and making New Jersey – NEW JERSEY, for God’s sake! – look like a haven of lawfulness.
I have a forthcoming book, “What Was Ralph Nader Thinking?” which tells The Pennsylvania Story, as well as the other states where the Dems tried to kick Nader off the ballot.
November 22nd, 2007 at 9:32 pm
UNBELIEVABLE! The PA Supreme Court is corrupt.
November 23rd, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Every single time a judicial retention is placed on the ballot, I always vote NO. Now you know why. Pennsylvania is spelled C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N. It extends all the way down to local elected officials. The USSC needs to hear this case.
November 23rd, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Nice…. another way to prevent true democracy by throwing a wrench in the gears.