On Sunday, September 13, the New Mexico Forward Party filed this reply brief in New Mexico Forward Party v Tpulouse Oliver, 26-2145. The issue is the New Mexico election law that requires a new party to file a petition to become qualified, but then (after the party nominates by convention) the law also requires each nominee of the new party to file his or her own separate petition.

The Forward Party complied with the first petition, but for its two statewide nominees, it was unable to collect the needed 14,246 that each needed on separate petitions. The party seeks injunctive relief to put its two statewide nominees on the ballot. If no injunction is received, New Mexico will be one of eight states this year in which all the statewide offices have only the Democratic and Republican nominees on the ballot. The other states are Alabama, California, Connecticut, Georgia, Louisiana, New York, and Virginia (two states, Utah and Washington, have no statewide offices up this year).

This year, Rhode Island elects all 38 State Senators and all 75 State Representatives. Out of those 113 legislative races, the Republican Party only has nominees in 29.

There are no minor party nominees for Rhode Island legislature this year. There weren’t any in 2024 either.

On September 11, the New Mexico Secretary of State filed this brief in New Mexico Forward Party v Toulouse Oliver, 26-2145. This is the ballot access case in which the Forward Party challenges the law that requires one petition to qualify a new party, and then (after the new party nominates candidates by convention), each nominated candidate must submit his or her own petition.

The Secretary’s brief, in an attempt to show that New Mexico has reasonable ballot access laws for minor parties, points out that in the last ten years, candidates from the American Delta Party, the Constitution Party, and the Better for America Party have appeared on the ballot. But the brief does not say that these parties only appeared on the ballot for president. The law requiring nominee petitions does not apply to presidential candidates. so the fact that those three parties appeared does not relate to the nominee petition issue at all.

Toward the end of the brief, it mentions that the Attorney General yesterday filed an amicus brief on the side of the Forward Party. The Secretary’s brief asserts that the Attorney General’s brief merely duplicates the Forward Party’s brief, but that is not true. The Attorney General’s amicus brief points out that the nominee petitions aren’t required for presidential nominees, a very important point that is not in the Tenth Circuit Forward Party brief.