New rules for Arkansas third party ballot access are among most onerous in American history

From Ballot Access News by Richard Winger on new Arkansas third party restrictions:

On December 11, Arkansas filed its brief in Libertarian Party of Arkansas v Martin, e.d., 4:15cv-635. The issue is a new law that says qualified minor parties (which nominate by convention) must nominate all their candidates for public office, except President and Vice-President, at least one year before the general election. No state has ever before required any type of party to nominate its candidates in the year before a November general election.

Arkansas major parties choose all their non-presidential nominees at their primaries on March 1, 2016, almost four months later. The state only cites one precedent to justify this discriminatory practice. In 1988, the Missouri Libertarian Party was late submitting its candidates for presidential elector, which were supposed to be listed on the party’s ballot access petition but which weren’t. The party handed in its presidential elector candidates several days after the petition deadline. The party then sued, saying it should not be required to submit its presidential elector candidates earlier than the qualified parties were required to submit them. The party lost in U.S. District Court and in the 8th circuit, although the vote in the 8th circuit was 5-5. That case was Manifold v Blunt.

The state’s brief says the party is not harmed by being required to choose all its nominees by November 9, 2015, at noon. The Arkansas Libertarians did hold a nominating convention by that date and did nominate some candidates, but it wants to nominate many more, and plans to hold another nominating convention in February 2016. The party argues that it takes time to find willing and able candidates, and that there is no state interest whatsoever in requiring the nominations to be made so early.

The state mentions the U.S. Supreme Court American Party of Texas v White, from 1974, which said that it is constitutional for the state to provide primaries only to the major parties, and to provide that smaller qualified parties nominate by convention. But the Texas law did not force the qualified minor parties to hold their conventions before the major party primaries, so it doesn’t support Arkansas’ scheme.