Green Party of Georgia v. State of Georgia, 551 F. App'x 982

Green Party of Georgia and Constitution Party of Georgia sued, challenging Georgia’s petition-signature requirement (1% of registered voters) for presidential candidates who are not recognized political parties.
Georgia moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing existing precedent upholding a 5% signature threshold forecloses the claim.
The district court dismissed for failure to state a claim, treating the 1% presidential rule as indistinguishable from prior 5% cases.
Plaintiffs appealed; Eleventh Circuit reviews de novo.
Eleventh Circuit held the district court erred by applying a "litmus-paper" approach instead of the Anderson balancing test and remanded for further proceedings.
The panel instructed that the State of Georgia be dismissed on remand due to Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Georgia’s 1% petition requirement for presidential ballot access violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments	The 1% rule burdens access to presidential ballot and requires Anderson balancing; prior 5% cases are distinguishable	Prior Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit rulings upholding 5% thresholds control and preclude relief	The court held prior 5% cases do not foreclose review; Anderson balancing must be applied and case distinguished
Whether courts may apply a categorical rule based on prior non-presidential cases	Litmus-paper approach misapplies precedent; each context requires balancing	Precedent upholding 5% thresholds supports dismissal here	Rejected categorical/litmus-paper test; Anderson balancing required
Whether presidential-ballot restrictions warrant different analysis than state/officer elections	Presidential elections implicate national interests and require different balancing	Defendant contended 5% precedent applicable regardless of office	Court held presidential elections implicate lesser state interest and may require a different balance
Whether State of Georgia is a proper defendant	Plaintiffs did not contest state immunity; suit named State	State asserted Eleventh Amendment immunity	Court instructed district court to dismiss the State of Georgia on remand for lack of jurisdiction

Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431 (1971) (upholding a state ballot-access signature requirement)
Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (1983) (framework for balancing ballot-access burdens against state interests)
Bergland v. Harris, 767 F.2d 1551 (11th Cir. 1985) (presidential ballot-access claims require Anderson balancing; prior 5% precedent not dispositive)
Coffield v. Kemp, 599 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir. 2010) (upholding a 5% petition threshold in non-presidential context)
Cartwright v. Barnes, 304 F.3d 1138 (11th Cir. 2002) (addressing ballot access/ signature thresholds)
McCrary v. Poythress, 638 F.2d 1308 (5th Cir. 1981) (noting ballot-access laws may differ constitutionally as applied to presidential elections)
Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984) (Eleventh Amendment bars suit against unconsenting states)