NEWS RELEASE
Libertarian Party of North Carolina
Libertarian Party of North Carolina
1821 Hillandale Rd. #1B-253 Durham NC 27705
919.286.0152 www.lpnc.org
*********************************************************************
For more information:
Sean Haugh, Executive Director - 919.286.0152
Thomas Hill, chair - 704.455.9200
LIBERTARIANS PREPARE LEGAL CHALLENGE TO BALLOT ACCESS LAW
919.286.0152 www.lpnc.org
*********************************************************************
For more information:
Sean Haugh, Executive Director - 919.286.0152
Thomas Hill, chair - 704.455.9200
LIBERTARIANS PREPARE LEGAL CHALLENGE TO BALLOT ACCESS LAW
DURHAM (Aug. 19) -The Libertarian Party of North Carolina is preparing a
lawsuit challenging the state's ballot access law. The party is facing
decertification by the State Board of Elections at a scheduled
teleconference meeting Monday.
"It's time we take the fight to court," said Thomas Hill, state chair. "Like
many other Libertarians, we're sick and tired of playing games with state
bureaucrats and legislators. We're tired of 'asking' for our birthright
Americans."
North Carolina has one of the most restrictive ballot access laws in the
nation. For example, in the 2000 election NC was one of only three states in
the country where votes for Green presidential candidate Ralph Nader weren't
counted.
The Libertarian Party spent $100,000 on a nine month petition drive just to
maintain their ballot access.
If the board of elections decertifies the Libertarian Party, they intend to
immediately file a suit to protect strong candidates running in the partisan
Charlotte and Winston-Salem city council elections.
Meanwhile, Libertarians are lobbying for passage of H88, the Electoral
Fairness Act. This bill was mired in committee while the General Assembly
battled over the budget.
H88 would reduce the number of signatures needed to keep a party on the
ballot to 25 percent of what it is now. It would also reduce the vote total
needed to stay on the ballot from 10 percent in the gubernatorial or
presidential race to 2 percent.
If the bill passes, Libertarians already have collected enough petition
signatures to stay on the ballot.
"But if the General Assembly slips out of town without passing the Electoral
Fairness Act, we can't wait - we won't wait - another year," said Hill. "Our
resolve is firm. We'll demand our rights now."
Libertarians believe they have a very strong case. "Very similar cases were
won since 1982 in Alaska, Maryland and Michigan and one is being fought in
Oklahoma right now," said Sean Haugh, the party's executive director.
In the Oklahoma case, Clingman v. Beaver, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that
state's ballot access restrictions. But in a dissenting opinion, Justice
Sandra Day O'Connor, joined by Justice Stephen Breyer, wrote that if all of
Oklahoma ballot access law were properly brought before them, "the Court
would want to examine the cumulative burdens imposed by the overall scheme
of electoral regulations upon the rights of voters and parties to associate
through primary elections."
While individual Oklahoma's "panoply" of ballot regulations might be
defensible, taken together, they may severely restrict participation and
competition. Libertarians note that Oklahoma's ballot access law is
extremely similar to that of North Carolina.
"If North Carolina won't lower the unconstitutional restrictions on free
association through ballot access, we'll have no choice but to seek redress
in court," Haugh said. "Based on the O'Connor and Breyer's dissent in
Clingman, we think it's a case the state cannot win."
"Clearly, our current laws are too restrictive to parties with significant
grassroots support in NC. They are not in line with ballot access
requirements in neighboring states. Worse still, they are unfair to the
voters, who are stay away from the voting booths in part because they don't
have enough choices to satisfy them.
lawsuit challenging the state's ballot access law. The party is facing
decertification by the State Board of Elections at a scheduled
teleconference meeting Monday.
"It's time we take the fight to court," said Thomas Hill, state chair. "Like
many other Libertarians, we're sick and tired of playing games with state
bureaucrats and legislators. We're tired of 'asking' for our birthright
Americans."
North Carolina has one of the most restrictive ballot access laws in the
nation. For example, in the 2000 election NC was one of only three states in
the country where votes for Green presidential candidate Ralph Nader weren't
counted.
The Libertarian Party spent $100,000 on a nine month petition drive just to
maintain their ballot access.
If the board of elections decertifies the Libertarian Party, they intend to
immediately file a suit to protect strong candidates running in the partisan
Charlotte and Winston-Salem city council elections.
Meanwhile, Libertarians are lobbying for passage of H88, the Electoral
Fairness Act. This bill was mired in committee while the General Assembly
battled over the budget.
H88 would reduce the number of signatures needed to keep a party on the
ballot to 25 percent of what it is now. It would also reduce the vote total
needed to stay on the ballot from 10 percent in the gubernatorial or
presidential race to 2 percent.
If the bill passes, Libertarians already have collected enough petition
signatures to stay on the ballot.
"But if the General Assembly slips out of town without passing the Electoral
Fairness Act, we can't wait - we won't wait - another year," said Hill. "Our
resolve is firm. We'll demand our rights now."
Libertarians believe they have a very strong case. "Very similar cases were
won since 1982 in Alaska, Maryland and Michigan and one is being fought in
Oklahoma right now," said Sean Haugh, the party's executive director.
In the Oklahoma case, Clingman v. Beaver, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that
state's ballot access restrictions. But in a dissenting opinion, Justice
Sandra Day O'Connor, joined by Justice Stephen Breyer, wrote that if all of
Oklahoma ballot access law were properly brought before them, "the Court
would want to examine the cumulative burdens imposed by the overall scheme
of electoral regulations upon the rights of voters and parties to associate
through primary elections."
While individual Oklahoma's "panoply" of ballot regulations might be
defensible, taken together, they may severely restrict participation and
competition. Libertarians note that Oklahoma's ballot access law is
extremely similar to that of North Carolina.
"If North Carolina won't lower the unconstitutional restrictions on free
association through ballot access, we'll have no choice but to seek redress
in court," Haugh said. "Based on the O'Connor and Breyer's dissent in
Clingman, we think it's a case the state cannot win."
"Clearly, our current laws are too restrictive to parties with significant
grassroots support in NC. They are not in line with ballot access
requirements in neighboring states. Worse still, they are unfair to the
voters, who are stay away from the voting booths in part because they don't
have enough choices to satisfy them.
