Ninth Circuit Sets Hearing Date for Hawaii Ballot Access Case

The 9th circuit will hear Nader v Cronin on June 17, in Honolulu. This is the case that challenges the number of signatures needed for an independent presidential candidate in Hawaii. The basis for the lawsuit is that it is not even rational to require over 4,000 signatures for independent presidential candidates, when the state permits a fully-qualified party (with its own primary) to qualify with 663 signatures.

This is the only ballot access case from 2004 that is still unsettled, except for Nader’s lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee (pending in state court in Maine), and except for Nader’s ongoing litigation over the $81,000 he was charged in Pennsylvania in 2004.

It may seem that 4,000 signatures is a trivial burden, but that is not the case. Hawaii tends to be extremely severe when it checks petitions, and invalidates signatures if the signer shows neither the last four digits of a Social Security number, or the birthday. No independent presidential petition has succeeded in Hawaii since 1996.


Comments

Ninth Circuit Sets Hearing Date for Hawaii Ballot Access Case — No Comments

  1. Separate is even NOT equal in HI.

    Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954

    Since when are the party hacks in any State *rational* ???

    P.R. and A.V.

  2. “The basis for the lawsuit is that it is not even rational to require over 4,000 signatures for independent presidential candidates, when the state permits a fully-qualified party (with its own primary) to qualify with 663 signatures.” If that argument were used in Pennsylvania, the proportional “not even rational” signature requirement would be about 12,000 signatures – half or less than half of what it is now.

  3. “If that argument were used in Pennsylvania, the proportional ‘not even rational’ signature requirement would be about 12,000 signatures – half or less than half of what it is now.”

    The petition signature requirement for statewide ballot access in Pennsylvania this year is 19,000 and something valid signatures.

  4. I fail to see why a State should require more then say, a thousand petition signatures for a statewide or federal office. Much less for state legislative races and local races — county and city — should be by simple request.

    If you can get 1,000 eligible people within 300 days to sign a petition, then you probably have enough support to at least be on the ballot.

  5. # 4 The party hack Supremes have screwed up ballot access since 1968 — due to their unique party hack ability to be totally EVIL/stupid about the EQUAL in the EQUAL protection clause in 14th Amdt, Sec. 1.

    Thus the nonstop ever changing ballot access law machinations and resulting court cases — due to the MORON Supremes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.