On February 5, Ralph Nader filed his response brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in the Arizona ballot access case. The purpose of his brief is to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court that it shouldn’t bother to hear Arizona’s appeal. The issues are whether the U.S. Constitution protects out-of-state circulators, and whether early June is too early for an independent presidential petition deadline. Here is the brief; it’s good reading, although unfortunately the attorneys who wrote it erroneously said that Nevada and Utah have even earlier deadlines than Arizona. Actually the Nevada deadline is in July and the Utah deadline is in September.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Arizona should switch to direct nomination of presidential candidates, just like it uses for all other offices, and then handle independent candidates as is done in Hawaii.
That wouldn’t work for presidential elections. After all, the true candidates are the candidates for presidential elector.
Separate is NOT equal.
Brown v Bd of Ed 1954
One more chance for the Supremes to overrule ALL of their JUNK ballot access cases going back to 1968 — Williams v. Rhodes.
#2 Independent presidential candidates name their presidential electors and vice presidential candidate. In Texas, even write-in candidates have to name their vice-presidential candidate and presidential electors.
Some states already provide that presidential candidates in the preferential primary name their delegate candidates. A vote in a preferential primary is actually a vote for a slate of convention delegates.
So a candidate who seeks the presidential nomination of their party could simply name their presidential elector candidates.