Steve Hagerty, writing in Evanston RoundTable, makes the case that election laws should allow individuals to sign more than one petition per office.
1
On Octdober 29, the South Dakota Supreme Court issued an order in Kathol v Johnson. It will issue a full opinion later. The issue is the petition validity of Celestine Stadnick’s petition and declaration of candidacy. The address on her declaration of candidacy doesn’t match the address on her voter registration record. Also, on her petition, some of her signers didn’t list the entire name of their county. The lower court had kept her on the ballot on May 19, so the ballots had already been printed with her name. She is the Democratic nominee. Her Republican opponent had brought the challenge.
Stadnick is running for State Senate, 27th district, which encompasses the Pine Ridge Reservation.
Here is an article about independent candidates in South Dakota this year that was published before the State Supreme Court had acted.
On November 2, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the federal government’s request that it order California to segregate out ballots that might be cast from a list of approximately 20,000 individuals. Justice Elena Kagan had referred the matter to the entire court, which rejected the request a few hours after it had been received. No justice dissented. U.S.A. v State of California, 26A624.
On November 2, the federal government asked the U.S. Supreme Court to order California to sequester approximately 20,000 ballots. U.S.A. v State of California, 26A624. Here is the filing.
On November 2, the New Hampshire Secretary of State asked a U.S. District Court to dismiss Aaron Day’s ballot access lawsuit. The issue had been whether states can require congressional candidates to be registered voters. Day had won injunctive relief on August 31, but the issue of declaratory relief has not been settled. The Secretary of State now wants the case dismissed before any decision on constitutionality can be made. See his filing here.
If the Court were to grant the request, that would prevent the case from creating a useful precedent.