No Labels wants to block some candidates from running. The law may not be on its side
The No Labels Party is doubling down on the contention that it has the right to block people from running in a state primary election it doesn’t want.
The nascent political party sued in federal court on Thursday to do what Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ office declined: Exclude two people who filed paperwork to run for state office without the support of the party’s leadership.
All indications suggest that No Labels stands little chance.
No Labels says it can exclude candidates
The party asserts that Arizona law allows political parties to participate only in elections that they choose and that the U.S. Constitution protects a party’s right to freely associate or not associate with candidates.
No Labels officials rest their argument on a state statute that says: “At a primary election, each political party entitled and intending to make nominations for the ensuing general or special election, if it desires to have the names of its candidates printed on the official ballot at that general or special election, shall nominate its candidates … .”
They interpret the qualifying language “intending to make nominations” and “if it desires to have the names of its candidates printed” to mean the law gives political parties the ultimate say on candidates and whether to hold a primary.
But state statutes also permit write-in candidates to qualify, with relative ease, for their party's nomination. There are no restrictions beyond the candidate having to register as a member of the party they're representing.
At least one of the two people who filed paperwork, Richard Grayson, is seeking to run as a write-in candidate — that is, forgoing the process of gathering nomination signatures needed to secure his name on the ballot.
Law says a party 'shall' be in a primary
Grayson is taking advantage of, as he has done before, Arizona’s lenient rules for parties that have “not qualified for continued representation,” including new political parties. Those rules allow a candidate to win the party nomination with a simple plurality of the vote.
As few as one.
Grayson won one primary race with a mere two votes and another one with 11.
More relevant is an Arizona law related to new political parties: “A new political party may become eligible for recognition and shall be represented by an official party ballot at the next ensuing regular primary election.”
No Labels will get: The primary election it doesn't want
In fact, the petition forms that No Labels backers circulated to collect signatures to qualify as a party contained essentially the same language.
It's reasonable to say that the more than 41,000 people who read and signed the petitions have a legitimate expectation of a primary election being held if the party won recognition.
A Green Party challenge also failed
No Labels’ lawsuit references rulings in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals supporting political parties’ rights to exclude particular candidates from primaries.
But Arizona is in the 9th Circuit. And rulings there assert that political parties do not have the right to block state laws on how parties nominate candidates.
No Labels’ suit isn’t the first time that Grayson, a lifelong Democrat who admits to simply wanting to sabotage No Labels, has been targeted for removal from running.
The Green Party sued him and other Green write-in primary winners in 2010, as well as the then-Secretary of State Ken Bennett and the 15 county recorders, to keep the Green primary winners off general election ballots.
The party lost.
Will No Labels fare differently?
Grayson welcomes another round of legal clarity.
Either way, he’ll be running as a No Labels party member regardless the outcome: Alaska last month certified him as a candidate for Congress in its open primary election.
Reach Abe Kwok at akwok@azcentral.com. On X, formerly Twitter: @abekwok.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: No Labels wants a judge to block candidates. Don't hold your breath
