Although no one qualified to appear on the New Mexico Republican primary ballot for U.S. Senate this year, the Republican Party is planning to nominate someone by write-in votes in the primary, which is in early June. See this story.
A previous blog post said that write-ins are not allowed in New Mexico primaries for U.S. Senate, but that was incorrect.
On March 9, the Idaho House passed HB 638. It restores presidential primaries, but requires a filing fee for presidential candidates. The bill makes no provision for presidential candidates who can’t afford the fee. The bill sets the date of the primaries in March.
The March 9 Chicago Tribune has this editorial, condemning the Illinois ballot access laws for independent and minor party candidates.
On March 5, the Oklahoma House Rules Committee passed HB 2425. It moves the non-presidential primary from June to early March. The presidential primary would then be combined with the primary for other offices. This is a drastic change. Because the date of the non-presidential primary is tied to the deadlines for non-presidential independent candidates. The deadline for non-presidential independents (who don’t need a petition) would be close to New Year’s Day of the election year.
The bill does not change the petition deadline for new parties, which would remain February 28. New parties would have missed the primary, so they would nominate by convention, but their candidates would have needed to file a declaration of candidacy on or around January 1.
On March 4, a California state trial court ordered the Secretary of State to put William Scott on the June 2026 ballot as a candidate for U.S. House, 26th district. Scott v Weber, Sacramento Superior Court, 26WM000040. Scott is a Republican.
Since 1996, the California election code has required candidates for congress or state office to sign a document saying the candidate supports the California Constitution. Scott argued that this law was an additional qualification to run for Congress, which contradicted a U.S. Supreme Court from 1995, U.S. Term Limits v Thornton, that states cannot add to the qualifications listed in the U.S. Constitution for congressional candidates.
California argued that the oath was just a “procedure”.
Other state laws that have been struck down on the basis of the qualifications argument are term limits, laws barring felons, laws requiring residency in the state at the time the candidate files to run for congress, and laws requiring congressional candidates to be registered voters.
