Search for: ""Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party" OR "520 U.S. 351"" Results 1 - 2 of 2
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
Three needed voting reforms
1 Oct 2012, 12:32 pm by Jon
Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997), that fusion is not a constitutionally protected civil right.The argument often made against fusion candidacies is that it is unfair for the same candidate to appear on the same ballot for the same office more than once, and that no one is deprived of the opportunity to vote for the candidate if his name appears at least once. [read post]
Constitution - http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Interim Post: Two Important Things All the Parties Get Wrong, and One Other Important Thing They Don’t Address
2 Feb 2024, 7:27 am by Marty Lederman
Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351, 364 (1997) (“States certainly have an interest in protecting the integrity, fairness, and efficiency of their ballots and election processes as means for electing public officials. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/