Libertarian Party of North Dakota v. Jaeger
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20953
8th Cir.2011Background
- Libertarian Party of North Dakota and three party candidates challenged ND Century Code § 16.1-11-36 as applied to their 2010 ballot access.
- Secretary of State Jaeger declined to place Passa, Stewart, and Ames on the general ballot after their primary because they did not reach the 1%/300 vote threshold.
- Candidates previously won their party primary but failed to show the required modicum of support to advance to the general ballot.
- District court dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6); plaintiffs appealed challenging First, Fourth, and Equal Protection claims.
- The Eighth Circuit reviewed de novo to determine whether the statute imposes a substantial or undue burden on rights.
- Court concluded the statute imposes a substantial but not undue burden and is supported by a compelling state interest; no equal protection violation found.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 16.1-11-36 burdens First/Fourteenth Amendment rights. | Passa et al. contend it imposes undue burden on ballot access. | Jaeger asserts the rule is reasonable to prevent frivolous ballots and maintain order. | Not undue; statute passes heightened but not strict scrutiny. |
| Whether § 16.1-11-36 violates Equal Protection. | Minor parties disadvantaged; burden not equally applied in practice. | All parties face same numerical standard; no disparate impact shown. | No equal protection violation; treatment is constitutional as applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLain v. Meier, 851 F.2d 1045 (8th Cir. 1988) (compelling state interest balancing for ballot access)
- McLain v. Meier, 637 F.2d 1159 (8th Cir. 1980) (initial framework for ballot access scrutiny)
- Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 (U.S. Supreme Court 1974) (eligible pool concept; signatures vs. votes)
- Am. Party of Tex. v. White, 415 U.S. 767 (U.S. Supreme Court 1974) (compelling state interests in ballot restrictions)
- Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431 (U.S. Supreme Court 1971) (significant modicum of support before ballot access)
- Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (U.S. Supreme Court 1969) (equal protection concerns for minor parties; practical impact)
- Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431 (U.S. Supreme Court 1971) (demonstrating modicum of support before ballot access)
- Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 (U.S. Supreme Court 1987) (primary deadlines as reasonable access regulation)
- Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (U.S. Supreme Court 1983) (no litmus test; case-by-case evaluation of restrictions)
- Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134 (U.S. Supreme Court 1972) (ballot access and runoffs; limits on signatures)