Ninth Circuit Issues Useful Opinion on Standing in Election Law Cases

On August 13, the 9th circuit issued this 31-page opinion in Wolfson v Brammer, 09-15298.  It says that a judicial candidate in 2008 has standing to challenge Arizona’s ban on certain kinds of speech for judicial candidates, even though the plaintiff-candidate said he would not run again for judge in 2010.  The U.S. District Court had dismissed his case, saying he lacks standing.

But the 9th circuit says he does have standing, and told the U.S. District Court to hear the merits of the case.  This decision will be useful in ballot access cases.  For example, earlier this year, a U.S. District Court in Montana ruled that the plaintiff who is suing to overturn the March petition deadline for independent candidates doesn’t have standing.  He has already appealed to the 9th circuit on that issue.


Comments

Ninth Circuit Issues Useful Opinion on Standing in Election Law Cases — 7 Comments

  1. The SouthWest Super-state Parliament Circuit #10
    Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma and Utah
    http://www.usparliament.org/ss10.htm

    Julian Waters [Cool Moose], Anita Goodman [Pansexual Freedom], Phil DeBlanc [Independent], Daniel Bartels [Bicycle],Vincent Hamm [Democratic], Ralph Bell [Pot], Jeff Verhey [Marijuana], Amy Hanson [Rocker], Dan Kennedy [Republican/Conservative], Tony Dunsworth [Libertarian], Raymond Rael [Hemp], Richard Haley [Info. Not Avail.], Hannah Dixon [Pot], Tom Kness [Info. Not Avail.], Shay Kastner [Pot], Evan Colletti [Pot], The Reverend Q [What’s Happening Now], Earl Bagwell [Green], Erika Wells [Pot], Tokenwhiteguy [Pot], Marc Black [Independent]

  2. The brain dead courts can NOT detect that a complaint involves alleged illegal acts/omissions at the time the complaint is filed — regardless of later events.

    Thus – the ongoing idiocy regarding standing.

  3. I never would have advised this before–given the ready acceptance of the “capable of repetition yet evading review” doctrine–but now I believe it is probably a good idea to ask for damages as well as prospective relief (i.e., put me on the ballot and declare the act illegal). A demand for even nominal damages will defeat a mootness argument, and courts these days–especially District Courts–love to dismiss election challenges on mootness grounds. I have run into this in Ohio, Louisiana and Mississippi recently.

  4. The South Super-state Parliament Circuit #6
    Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee
    http://www.usparliament.org/ss6.htm

    Vanessa Morley [Defender of the Republic], CR Carter [Libertarian/Republican], Kirk Joseph [Independent], George Morrison [Freedom], Millich Person [Info. Not Avail.], William Lee Mayers [Pot], Thorn [Pot], Steven C. Dobbs [Pot], C.L.Gammon [Liberty First], Josh Sasser [Independent], Wendy [Unsure], Robert Davenport [Pot], Lucy Star [Pot]

  5. # 3 How come a zillion election law bureaucrats have NOT gone bankrupt with damages imposed on them for violating constitutional and statutory *rights* ???

    Damages in ALL election law cases should be FIRST — to put the MORON legislatures and bureaucrats on notice.

  6. #5, because election officials enjoy qualified immunity, which tends to protect them. See, e.g., Nader v. Blackwell (6th Cir. 2008).

  7. # 6 Only because the party hack MORON courts invented such qualified immunity out of thin air.

    The ONLY very limited immunity is for Congress folks.

    Art. I, Sec. 6 part — *** and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

    — i.e. a blank check for the Congress folks to libel ANY body (for history reasons – going back to the tyrant monarchs in England for centuries — putting Parliament folks in jail (or worse) for their speeches and debates critical of the monarchs and their appointed stooges).

    ALL the other *immunity* stuff is a TOTAL perversion / subversion of the Constitution invented by the courts out of their asses — especially regarding executive branch officers.

    The party hack SCOTUS folks have a unique EVIL power to pervert and subvert legal history — and do it routinely.

    Thus the TOTAL EVIL legal mess in the U.S.A. — UNEQUAL ballot laws, minority rule gerrymanders, immunity junk [i.e. LAWLESS state/local legislative bodies, LAWLESS U.S.A./State/Local executive officers and even worse LAWLESS judges], standing junk, etc. etc. — all heading for a TOTAL Civil WAR II.

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.