Pennsylvania Federal Court Denies Injunctive Relief to Constitution Party

[Bradley in DC]

http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/09...cisions-today/

Pennsylvania Federal Court Denies Injunctive Relief to Constitution Party
September 12th, 2008
On September 12, at 6:30 p.m., U.S. District Court Judge Yvette Kane denied injunctive relief to the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania. She said that it is possible the legislature had delegated authority to the State Elections Department to write a regulation setting a filing deadline. She also said that even if the Elections Department did not have authority from the legislature to do that, that setting aside the August 1 deadline would restore the old unconstitutional May deadline, and that would injure the other petitioning groups this year. The case is Baldwin v Cortes, 1:08cv-1626.

This lawsuit will have been beneficial, despite this disappointing outcome. Since the case only denied injunctive relief, not declaratory relief, it is still alive. It is very likely that regardless of what happens next in the lawsuit, the legislature will now understand how important it is to pass a bill setting a constitutional deadline. As noted in earlier posts on this matter, the old deadline was invalidated by two federal courts in 1984, and the legislature has ignored those 1984 decisions and has never replaced the old May deadline.

[RJ Liberty]

The Constitution Party of Pennsylvania has just won their long battle with Pennsylvania authorities.

On June 30, U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Stengel issued an order in Constitution Party of Pennsylvania v Cortes, e.d., cv-12-2726. It says that for 2016, statewide petitions in Pennsylvania will need exactly 5,000 signatures. If the petition has candidates for the three statewide state offices that are up this year (Attorney General, Auditor, and Treasurer), they also need at least 250 signatures from each of five counties.

Full story on Ballot Access News.

[euphemia]

They are in court in Tennessee, too.