Home Uncategorized U.S. District Court Rules that Ohio’s Minor Parties May Remain on the Ballot for 2014
formats

U.S. District Court Rules that Ohio’s Minor Parties May Remain on the Ballot for 2014

On January 7, U.S. District Court Judge Michael H. Watson ruled that due process requires that Ohio not implement its new ballot access barriers for minor parties for the 2014 election. The 28-page opinion depends on the fact that the Ohio legislature did not pass the new requirements until November 2013, after various candidates of the minor parties had already been circulating petitions to place themselves on their own party’s primary ballot. The case is Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, southern district, 2:13cv-953.

The decision also depends on the fact that the new law doesn’t take effect until February 2014. The Republican majority in the legislature wanted the new requirements to take effect immediately, but the bill would have needed 60% in each House of the legislature to take effect immediately, and because some Republican legislators voted against the bill, the bill did not pass with 60% in the State House.

The decision says, “The Ohio Legislature moved the proverbial goalpost in the midst of the game. Stripping the Plaintiffs of the opportunity to participate in the 2014 primary in these circumstances would be patently unfair.”

8 Responses

  1. Kevin Knedler

    Well another win for the LPO in Ohio.
    But a bigger win for the voters of Ohio and Voter FREEDOM.

    Kevin

  2. Demo Rep

    Every election is NEW.
    Equal ballot access tests for ALL candidates for the same office.

    Much too difficult for the armies of MORON judges and lawyers in ballot access cases.

  3. Cody Quirk

    This is good, yet the battle still isn’t over; the state could appeal it.

  4. Richard Winger

    The state says it hasn’t decided yet whether to appeal or not. I am betting that the state will not appeal. Time is on the side of the minor parties. And there is nothing to attack in the U.S. District Court decision. The state has no court precedents on its side in a situation like this, whereas there are precedents on the side of the minor parties.

    • Mark Axinn

      I agree that an appeal is unlikely, especially given the fact that the law was struck down primarily because of its unconstitutional retroactive effect on the LPO candidates

      It’s a lot easier for Ohio legislature just to pass another heinous law, albeit not in time to keep the LP off the ballot for 2014.

      Watch for them to challenge 2016 instead.

  5. Losty

    Congrats Kevin, and the other (2, 3 parties? assuming Americans Elect is still dormant)

    Now, About Post Primary, They punted on that, so if no appeal, Injunction stands, there’s a Primary, then the new law kicks in. What then?

  6. Jim Riley

    The opinion wastes a lot of time discussing issues which were totally irrelevant to the issue of an injunction for the 2014 election.

  7. :-)

    Well awesome. Finally something goes right in f@scist Ohio.

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Protected with SiteGuarding.com Antivirus