About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 No Relief from State Court Judgment Allowing Ballot Petition Signers to Withdraw Their Signatures 1 (2021)

handle is hein.congcourts/nrffmse0001 and id is 1 raw text is: CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION No Relief from State Court Judgment Allowing Ballot Petition Signers to Withdraw Their Signatures Davis v. Stapleton (Dana L. Christensen, D. Mont. 6:20-cv-62) A state court vacated certification of a minor political party for a general election ballot after ballot petition signers withdrew their signatures when they found out that they were collected by a differ- ent political party. Ostensible minor party candidates and voters were denied relief in federal court from the state court judgment, because allowing signers to withdraw their signatures was not obvi- ously improper. Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Enjoining certification; getting on the ballot; matters for state courts; party procedures; primary election; intervention; interlocutory appeal; COVID-19. An August 11, 2020, federal complaint filed in the District of Montana by two Green Party candidates and two Green Party primary election voters challenged an August 7 state court ruling vacating Montana's March 6 quali- fication of the Green Party for the November 3 general election ballot on a finding that enough signers of the party's ballot petition had withdrawn their support to yield an insufficient number of remaining signatures.1 With their complaint, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.2 On the following day, Judge Dana L. Christensen ordered a response to the motion by August 17.3 The state's Democratic Party, the plaintiff in the state court action, moved to intervene in the federal case on Thursday, August 13.4 Judge Chris- tensen granted the motion on the next day. On Monday, Judge Christensen granted a motion by the Republican Party to appear as an amicus curiae.6 Judge Christensen denied the plaintiffs immediate relief on August 19.' He found that the signatures were collected by agents of the Republican Par- 1. Complaint, Davis v. Stapleton, No. 6:20-cv-62 (D. Mont. Aug. 11, 2020), D.E. 1; Davis v. Stapleton, 480 F. Supp. 3d 1099, 1102 (D. Mont. 2020). 2. Motion, Davis, No. 6:20-cv-62 (D. Mont. Aug. 11, 2020), D.E. 3; Davis, 480 F. Supp. 3d at 1102. 3. Order, Davis, No. 6:20-cv-62 (D. Mont. Aug. 12, 2020), D.E. 6. 4. Intervention Motion, id. (Aug. 13, 2020), D.E. 8; Davis, 480 F. Supp. 3d at 1102. 5. Order, Davis, No. 6:20-cv-62 (D. Mont. Aug. 14, 2020), D.E. 11; Davis, 480 F. Supp. 3d at 1102. 6. Order, Davis, No. 6:20-cv-62 (D. Mont. Aug. 17, 2020), D.E. 13; see Motion, id. (Aug. 17, 2020), D.E. 12; see Davis, 480 F. Supp. 3d at 1102. 7. Davis, 480 F. Supp. 3d 1099. Federal Judicial Center 8/10/2021 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most