U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle granted an emergency injunction on Monday directing the North Carolina State Board of Elections to certify the Justice for All party and place its candidates on the ballot in November.
The decision comes after three party supporters sued the elections board after it declined to recognize the party, foreclosing the possibility of getting its presidential candidate, left-wing academic Cornel West, on the 2024 presidential ballot.
The board’s Democratic majority voted against JFA earlier this month after raising concerns about misleading petition gatherers and signers who asked for their signatures to be removed. The board also said an investigation into potentially fraudulent signatures is ongoing.
“In declining to certify JFA as a new political party, the board has categorically excluded JFA and its candidates from the ballot,” Boyle wrote in his order. “As a result, the board has precluded those voters who wish to associate with both from exercising their First Amendment right to do so. That is a severe burden on First Amendment rights.”
Boyle’s decision means West will be allowed to appear as a presidential candidate on North Carolina’s November ballot.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court, accused the board of violating the party members’ “core First Amendment rights as voters and citizens who wish to grow and develop a new political party in North Carolina.”
Party supporters also accused the board of violating their due process rights by failing to provide them with specific evidence to discredit the signatures they provided in their petition campaign for ballot access.
The board cited issues with petition gathering and potential fraud in the party’s signature collection process.
Boyle made the decision after hearing arguments from attorneys Mary Carla Babb, representing the State Board of Elections, and Phillip Strach, who represented the plaintiffs, on July 30 in Elizabeth City.
Though West is running as a left-wing candidate, the party’s supporters were represented in court by Strach, a prominent conservative attorney. Strach frequently represents the state’s Republican legislative leaders in court and has recently defended them in gerrymandering lawsuits and challenges to stricter election laws.
The state Republican Party commended the court on Tuesday morning for its ruling.
“This partisan board failed the people of North Carolina for months abusing the certification process. Now, these contests will be decided where they should: by the citizens of our great state,” NC GOP Communications Director Matt Mercer said in a statement.
The court’s ruling could be appealed, but time is running out for any further changes to ballots. The ballot printing process begins in mid-August and the first absentee ballots are sent out to voters on Sept. 6.
‘Have to follow the law’
West joined the lawsuit as an intervening plaintiff, as well as JFA Co-Chair Italo Medelius and the party itself. Attorney Oliver Hall, with the Center for Competitive Democracy, represented the intervenor-plaintiffs in the hearing on July 30.
“Our campaign stands in solidarity with the Justice for All Party and all those who seek justice and truth in the electoral process,” West said in a campaign press release on Aug. 2. “We are committed to ensuring that every voice is heard and that our place on the ballot is secured. As we join this lawsuit, we remain focused on fighting for truth, justice, and love.”
At the hearing, Strach argued that the Justice for All party had more than enough verified signatures to be on the ballot, saying “that should be the end of the story.” According to the complaint, the party was required to submit 13,865 valid signatures and it had 17,362 signatures validated by county board of elections.
“Instead of taking this at face value, like they did for others, JFA was the only party they subjected to this sloppy review,” he said.
Babb called for Boyle to dismiss the case because the “resolution of this is dependent on a state law issue.”
“The parties have to follow the law, and that’s not what happened in this particular case,” she said.
Boyle asked several questions of both attorneys throughout the hearing, though he returned to one question on several occasions: “Do you want more people to vote or fewer people to vote?”
In the order, Boyle commented on the state board’s action, saying “narrow tailoring requires a scalpel; the Board used a blunt instrument.”
“The Board effectively disenfranchised over 17,000 North Carolina voters who signed petitions to certify JFA as a new political party on flawed, highly suspect grounds,” he wrote. “Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs First Amendment claims are likely to succeed on the merits.”
Growing criticism from the right
The board’s Republicans disagreed with its decision — with member Stacy “Four” Eggers noting that the party had passed the threshold of signatures required to form a new party.
In that same meeting, board members voted 4-1 in favor of certifying Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s new party, We the People, after having initially voted against certification in June.
The North Carolina Democratic Party sued over the board’s decision to certify Kennedy, but a judge rejected its challenge on Monday.
The board has faced a wave of criticism from Republicans and independents since it initially voted to deny ballot access to Kennedy and West in June. State lawmakers, advocacy groups and even congressional leaders accused the board’s Democrats of trying to boost their party’s presidential nominee by eliminating third-party challengers.
In a court filing, the North Carolina Republican Party and Republican National Committee allege that the board’s action infringed North Carolinians’ constitutional rights by denying “the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice.”
The state House Oversight Committee grilled the board chair and executive director about their handling of the parties, questioning the influence of politics on the board’s decisions.
Clear Choice Action, a group tied to President Joe Biden with goals to dissuade voters from supporting third-party presidential candidates, filed a brief opposing an injunction.
In it, the group called party’s signature gathering process “a sham petitioning effort marred by fraudulent and misleading signature gathering practices by third-party groups unaffiliated with — and politically unaligned with — the proposed party.”
House Speaker Tim Moore, Rep. Destin Hall and Rep. Grey Mills, all Republicans, filed a brief in support of the injunction.
“From the initial delay of proceedings to the final rejection based on a questionable survey, the State Board took its cues from Clear Choice — a group openly dedicated to keeping third-party candidates off the ballot to protect Democrats,” the Republican leaders said in the court filing.
___
© 2024 McClatchy Washington Bureau
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
