103 F. Supp. 3d 681
E.D. Pa.2015Background
- Green Party, Libertarian Party, and affiliated individuals challenge Pennsylvania’s nomination-paper regime for minor parties seeking general-election ballot access.
- They challenge 25 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 2911(a), (c), and (d) governing use of nomination papers and circulators.
- Plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive, and mandamus relief regarding signatures, residency attestations, and related filing requirements.
- Court previously granted partial relief and denied parts of the motion after a July 2014 hearing, and noted revised nomination forms rendered several claims moot.
- As of March 2, 2015, the sole remaining dispute was whether the county-by-county nomination-paper sheets requirement burdened First Amendment rights, with the court signaling a path toward final resolution based on the parties’ affidavits.
- The court ultimately denied summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the county-sheet requirement and granted it to the defendants, while affirming mootness of several counts due to the Commonwealth’s form changes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the county-by-county nomination-sheet requirement constitutional? | Green Party argues it burdens speech | Commonwealth argues it is reasonable, nondiscriminatory | Yes, the requirement is reasonable and nondiscriminatory |
| Do mootness issues about previously abandoned forms continue to present a case or controversy? | Rossi contends mootness arguments do not extinguish live claims | Commonwealth argues revised forms render claims moot | Mootness affirmed; prior mooted counts remain resolved |
Key Cases Cited
- Burden v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (1992) (framework for Burdick/Anderson balancing in election law)
- Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (1983) (scope of burden and level of scrutiny in ballot-access cases)
- Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997) (state interests need not be narrowly tailored if burden is reasonable and nondiscriminatory)
- Rogers v. Corbett, 468 F.3d 188 (3d Cir. 2006) (ballot-access burden balancing and elasticity of scrutiny)
- Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442 (2008) (facial challenges require careful restraint; repetition risks)