A federal judge has for the second time quashed Jason Bartlett’s bid for rule changes to enable him to appear on the Aug. 11 State Senate primary ballot.
U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall issued that ruling Thursday.
She denied a motion by Bartlett to reconsider an earlier decision she made denying a request that she issue a preliminary injunction against the state’s modified rules for collecting signatures to appear on primary ballots amid the Covid-19 pandemic. Bartlett had argued that the changes still made it unconstitutionally difficult for a challenger to collect enough signatures to succeed.
Bartlett asked her to reconsider that earlier June 8 decition based on two pieces of alleged new evidence: His experience trying to collect the signatures. And what he called confusing direction from the state about the need to have a witness sign the backs of petition forms. (Read about that here.)
In her new ruling, Hall stated that Bartlett had the information to bring up the “new” evidence during a hearing on the earlier motion, but didn’t; and that the state’s rules about signing the backs of petition forms were clear. Read her decision here.
“If Bartlett fails to qualify for the ballot, it will not be because the election laws unconstitutionally burden his First Amendment rights by “virtually exclud[ing]” him from the ballot,” Hall wrote.
“In a similar way, if the Secretary of State determines these signatures to be invalid, it will not because the election laws or the Guidance were confusing or misleading. Instead, such a consequence would be the result of Bartlett’s failure to abide by the clear language of Executive Order 7LL and its Guidance.”
Bartlett sought to appear on the Aug. 11 Democratic primary ballot against incumbent State Sen. Gary Winfield. Bartlett submitted enough signatures of registered Democrats to qualify, but failed to have the backs of the petitions signed by witnesses. Bartlett still plans to petition his way onto the general election ballot on an independent line. So does Alex Taubes, an attorney who represented Bartlett in this case. Taubes seeks to challenge incumbent State Sen. Martin Looney.
“I had low expectations on winning this ruling because I thought the judge’s original ruling was insensitive to our environment during Covid,” Bartlett commented Thursday after the ruling was issued. “We will win this marathon for State Senate come November.”
Taubes criticized the decision for “fail[ing] to take into account the on-the-ground reality of canvassing during Covid. The state, the Democratic Party, and now the courts have forced candidates across this state to choose between the health of their community and the health of their democracy. We can’t make our case in person in court, but the courts expect something different for people trying to make a difference in their democracy. It’s absurd.”
In other Covid-related election news, the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit Thursday seeking to have the state to allow all voters to cast absentee ballots in the Nov. 3 general election.
