1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

)

THE INDEPENDENT PARTY OF )

FLORIDA and THE PARTY FOR )

SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Case No. 

)

LAUREL M. LEE, Florida )

Secretary of State, in her official )

capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

)

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs The Independent Party of Florida and The Party for 

Socialism and Liberation, by and through their undersigned counsel, 

state and allege as follow:

PARTIES

1. The Independent Party of Florida (the “Independent Party”) is a 

plaintiff in this action. The chairman of the party is Ernest Bach

(“Bach”) and the party is headquartered in Largo, Florida. The 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 13
2

Independent Party is a “minor political party” as that term is defined in 

Fla. Stat. ¶ 97.021(19).

2. The Party for Socialism and Liberation (the “Party for 

Socialism”) is a plaintiff in this action. The chairman of the party is 

Bryan Ellis (“Ellis”) and the party is headquartered in Sarasota, 

Florida. The Party for Socialism is a “minor political party” as that term 

is defined in Fla. Stat. § 97.021(19).

3. Laurel M. Lee (“Lee”) is the Florida Secretary of State with 

offices in Tallahassee, Florida. Lee “is the chief election officer of the 

state, and it is [] her responsibility to: (1) Obtain and maintain 

uniformity in the interpretation and implementation of the election 

laws” pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 97.012(1). Lee is sued in her official 

capacity.

JURISDICTION

4. This lawsuit asserts that the Plaintiffs are deprived of several 

fundamental civil and constitutional rights guaranteed by the United 

States Constitution by the regulations and requirements for ballot 

access applied against the Plaintiffs as articulated by Fla. Stat. § 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 13
3

103.021(4)(a) and (b). This court has jurisdiction over this action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

VENUE

5. Venue is proper in the Tallahassee Division of the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of Florida because Lee’s office is 

located in Tallahassee, Florida.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

6. Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(a) allows minor political parties to 

nominate presidential and vice presidential candidates on the general 

election ballot by submitting a certificate naming the candidates and 

listing the names of the electors, but only if that minor political party is 

affiliated with a “national party.” In turn, “national party” is defined in 

the statute as “a political party that is registered with and recognized 

as a qualified national committee of a political party by the Federal 

Election Commission.”

7. In turn, Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(b) sets forth the method to 

nominate presidential and vice presidential candidates on the general 

election ballot for minor political parties that do not qualify for the 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 13
4

nomination by certification. The statute requires the submission of a 

petition signed by 1% of the registered voters of the state.

8. The Florida legislature passed the current version of the law in 

2011 when it passed HB 1355.

9. Prior to 2011, the then-existing law was passed in 1999 allowing 

minor political parties to be a qualified party under state law if the 

party filed a list of its officers, copy of its bylaws, and agreed to report 

information about its finances. As a qualified party under state law, the 

minor political party was allowed to place its presidential and vice 

presidential candidates on the ballot by certification if the party was 

affiliated with a national political party that held a national 

presidential convention.

10. In 2000, eight minor political parties certified the names of their 

candidates on the Florida presidential ballot.

11. In 2004, six minor political parties certified the names of their 

candidates on the Florida presidential ballot.

12. In 2008, eleven minor political parties certified the names of 

their candidates on the Florida presidential ballot.

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 13
5

13. In 2004, the Reform Party nominated Ralph Nader for 

president. A lawsuit was filed by certain individuals challenging the 

Reform Party as a bona fide party. The Florida Supreme Court rejected 

the lawsuit on the merits, but noted in the decision that term “national 

party” was undefined in the statutory schema.

14. In 2005, the Florida legislature defined “national party” as a 

party that is on at least one ballot other than Florida.

15. In 2011, after HB 1355 was passed, the Florida Secretary of 

State did not enforce the new statute and allowed all minor political 

parties to nominate their presidential candidates by certificate. The 

Secretary of State’s general counsel issued a letter citing an inability to 

reliably determine which parties were recognized as a national 

committee by the United States Federal Election Commission.

16. Shortly before the 2016 election, the Secretary of State informed 

both the Independent Party and the Party for Socialism that their 

certificates naming their presidential and vice presidential candidates 

were rejected because they did not submit a petition as required by Fla. 

Stat. § 103.021(4)(b).

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 13
6

17. At the time of that notification, there was not sufficient time to 

file a lawsuit to litigate the issue before the ballots were printed.

18. The Independent Party and the Party for Socialism both intend 

to nominate candidates for President and Vice President in the 2020 

election cycle.

Federal Election Commission Recognition

19. The United States Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) 

publishes criteria for recognizing a political party as a national 

committee: (1) Nominating qualified candidates for President and 

various Congressional offices in numerous states; (2) Engaging in 

certain activities – such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote 

drives – on an ongoing basis; (3) Publicizing the party’s supporters and 

primary issues throughout the nation; (4) Holding a national 

convention; (5) Setting up a national office; and (6) Establishing state 

affiliates. See www.fec.gov/press/resources-journalists/political-parties/

(last accessed on February 10, 2020).

20. The FEC has issued six opinions over the years recognizing 

parties as national committees: (1) Libertarian Party in 1975; (2) 

Socialist Party in 1980; (3) Natural Law Party in 1992; (4) U.S. 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 13
7

Taxpayers Party in 1995, (but this party changed its name to the 

Constitution Party in 1999); (5) Reform Party in 1998; and (6) Green 

Party in 2001. The Democratic Party and Republican Party are also 

recognized national committees although the FEC has never issued an 

opinion to that effect.

21. The Florida Division of Election currently lists the following 

parties as active major or minor political parties in the State of Florida:

Major Political Parties:

(1) Florida Democratic Party;

(2) Republican Party of Florida;

Minor Political Parties:

(3) Constitution Party of Florida;

(4) Ecology Party of Florida;

(5) Green Party of Florida;

(6) Independent Party of Florida;

(7) Libertarian Party of Florida;

(8) Party for Socialism and Liberation – Florida;

(9) Reform Party of Florida.

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 13
8

See https://dos.myflorida.com/elections/candidates-committees/politicalparties/ (last accessed on February 10, 2020).

22. There are two parties recognized by the FEC as national 

committees that have no association or organization in Florida that 

qualifies as a “minor political party”: the Socialist Party and the 

Natural Law Party. The Party for Socialism and Liberation – Florida is 

not affiliated with the Socialist Party recognized by the FEC as a 

national committee.

23. In addition to the two Plaintiffs in this case, the Ecology Party 

of Florida also is qualified as a minor political party in Florida but is 

not affiliated with a party recognized by the FEC as a national 

committee.

24. Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4) exempts some minor political parties 

from the 1% signature requirement allowing those exempted parties the 

ability to merely certify their candidates for President and Vice 

President solely by having recognition by the FEC as a national 

committee. The sole criteria upon which this exemption is based – FEC 

recognition as a national committee – is not narrowly tailored to further 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 8 of 13
9

a legitimate regulatory interest and less burdensome alternatives are 

available to meet the state’s legitimate interests.

25. Florida’s statute that allows minor political parties access to the 

general election ballot by submitting a petition signed by 1% of the 

registered electors effective for the previous general election is overly 

and unconstitutionally burdensome on the Plaintiffs’ rights of 

association, political advocacy, free speech, and the party’s members 

rights to vote for the candidate of their choice.

26. The signature requirement would cost over $100,000 to hire and 

train sufficient laborers to circulate ballot access petitions to meet the 

1% signature requirement, and consequently, the regulation is not 

narrowly tailored to further a legitimate regulatory interest and less 

burdensome alternatives are available to meet the state’s legitimate 

interests.

27. Three presidential election cycles occurred under the prior law 

allowing minor political parties access to the ballot by certification 

(2000, 2004, and 2008) and the longest ballot contained thirteen party 

candidate names (2008). A ballot containing even thirteen party 

candidates for president and vice president is not confusing, unwieldy, 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 13
10

or otherwise overburdensome on the average voter. Consequently, the 

certification requirement set out in Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(a) is

narrowly tailored to meet the state’s interest in producing a ballot that 

is neither unwieldy nor confusing. Furthermore, the certification 

requirement is not overly burdensome on the Plaintiff parties’ and their 

members’ civil and constitutional rights.

COUNT ONE

(Violation of Plaintiffs’

First and Fourteenth Amendment Rights)

28. The Plaintiffs incorporate each of the foregoing paragraphs 

numbered 1 through 27 into Count One as if they were fully articulated 

herein.

29. The petition requirements set forth in Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(b) 

that require the submission of a petition signed by one percent of the 

registered voters is an unconstitutional restriction on the Plaintiffs’ 

First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to association, free speech, 

political activity, and their respective members’ rights to vote for the 

candidates of their choice.

30. The petition requirements set forth in Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(b) 

are not narrowly tailored to further a legitimate state interest.

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 10 of 13
11

31. The requirement that the party affiliate with a national political 

party recognized by the FEC as a national committee to be qualified to 

nominate candidates for President and Vice President by certification 

as set forth in Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(a) is not narrowly tailored to 

further a legitimate state interest.

COUNT TWO

(Violation of Plaintiffs’ Rights Guaranteed

by the Equal Protection Clause)

32. The Plaintiffs incorporate each of the foregoing paragraphs 

numbered 1 through 31 into Count Two as if they were fully articulated 

herein.

33. Florida provides two paths to the Presidential ballot for minor 

political parties, one which requires a petition signed by 1% of the 

registered voters in the state, the other by the party sending a 

certification to the Secretary of State. One path is extremely time 

consuming and expensive and the other is relatively easy. Which path 

each party must take depends solely on whether the party is affiliated 

with a national party the FEC recognizes as a national committee.

34. The FEC’s recognition of a political party as a national

committee is not rationally related to the level of support that party has

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 11 of 13
12

in Florida, as evidenced by the Socialist Party and Natural Law Party, 

both of which have no minor political party affiliates in Florida.

35. The party affiliation with a national committee is not rationally 

related to any legitimate state interest in regulating access to the 

Presidential ballot. Consequently, the ballot access requirements for the 

Plaintiffs, cause injury and violate the rights guaranteed by the Equal 

Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

A. Enter a declaratory judgment holding that the 1% signature 

requirement set forth at Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(b) is unconstitutional as 

applied to the Plaintiffs;

B. Enter a declaratory judgment holding that the statute limiting 

application of Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(a) only to minor political parties 

that are affiliated with national political parties that are recognized by 

the FEC as a national committee is unconstitutional as applied to the 

Plaintiffs;

C. Enter an order permanently enjoining the Secretary of State 

from enforcing Fla. Stat. § 103.021(4)(b)’s one-percent signature 

requirement against the Plaintiffs and from enforcing Fla. Stat. § 

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 12 of 13
13

103.021(4)(a)’s prohibition against minor political parties from 

certifying their Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates if they are 

not affiliated with a national political party that is recognized by the 

FEC as a national committee;

D. Award other and further relief as the Court deems proper;

E. Award litigation costs and attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1988; and

F. Retain jurisdiction of this action and grant the Plaintiffs any 

further relief which may in the discretion of the Court be necessary and 

proper.

Dated this 24th day of February, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

THE BERNHOFT LAW FIRM, S.C.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By: /s/ Daniel J. Treuden

Daniel J. Treuden

Pro hac vice motion pending

1402 E. Cesar Chavez Street

Austin, Texas 78702

telephone: (512) 582-2100

facsimile: (512) 373-3159

djtreuden@bernhoftlaw.com

Case 4:20-cv-00110-MW-MAF Document 1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 13 of 13