Document: 530 U.S. 567120 S.Ct. 2402147 L.Ed.2d 502 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of United States Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Supreme Court States, Washington, D. C. 20543, any typographical or other errors, order that corrections may be made goes press.CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY et al., PETITIONERSv.BILL JONES, SECRETARY OF STATE CALIFORNIA, al. No. 99-401. SUPREME COURT THE UNITED STATES Argued April 24, 2000 Decided June 26, CERTIORARI TO APPEALSFOR NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus One way candidates for public office California gain access general ballot by winning a qualified political party's primary. In 1996, Proposition 198 changed State's partisan primary from closed primary, which only members can vote on its nominees, blanket each voter's lists every candidate regardless party affiliation and allows voter choose freely among them. The who wins most votes nominee election. Each petitioner parties prohibits nonmembers voting They filed suit against respondent state official, alleging, inter alia, violated their First Amendment rights association. Respondent Californians an Open Primary intervened. District held primary's burden petitioners' associational was not severe justified substantial interests. Ninth Circuit affirmed. Held: California's violates right Pp. 4-19. (a) play major role structuring monitoring election process, but processes select nominees wholly affairs regulate freely. To contrary, must act within limits imposed Constitution when regulating parties' internal processes. See, e.g., Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 214. Respondents misplace reliance Smith Allwright, 321 649, Terry Adams, 345 461, affairs, free protections, see, Tashjian Republican Party Conn., 479 208, that, State prescribes process gives special parties, discriminatory action becomes under Fifteenth Amendment. Nation has tradition associations citizens band together promote espouse views. protects freedom join further common beliefs, id., at 214-215, presupposes identify those constitute association, limit association people, Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette, 450 107, 122. no area association's exclude more important than candidate-selection process. That often determines positions significant policy issues, it ambassador charged with electorate over reserves place, accords protection, Eu, supra, 224, because moment choosing crucial juncture appeal principles translated into concerted action, hence power, Tashjian, 216. these principles. forces petitioners adulterate process-a basic function-by opening up persons unaffiliated party, have different views party. Such forced likely outcome-indeed, 198's intended outcome-of changing message. Because there heavier freedom, unconstitutional unless narrowly tailored serve compelling interest. See Timmons Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 351, 358. 4-14. (b) None respondents' seven proffered interests-producing elected officials better represent electorate, expanding debate beyond scope concerns, ensuring disenfranchised enjoy effective vote, promoting fairness, affording voters greater choice, increasing participation, protecting privacy-is interest justifying intrusion rights. 14-18. 169 F.3d 646, reversed. Scalia, J., delivered Court, Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Breyer, JJ., joined. concurring opinion. Stevens, dissenting opinion, Ginsburg, joined as Part I. Opinion Justice Scalia Court. 1 case presents question whether may, consistent Constitution, use so-called "blanket" determine 2 * Under law, two routes federal elective offices. He receive nomination primary,1 see Cal. Elec. Code Ann. §§15451, 13105(a) (West 1996); he file independent obtaining (for statewide race) signatures one percent races) three population represented contest, §8400. 3 Until what known "closed" party-i.e., declared they register §§2150, 2151 1996 Supp. 2000)-can nominee, §2151 1996). adopted initiative 198. Promoted largely measure would "weaken" "hard-liners" ease "moderate problem-solvers," App. 89-90 (reproducing pamphlet distributed voters), new system, "[a]ll entitled including affiliated shall - candidate's affiliation." §2001 2000); also §2151. Whereas received limited his own result now It remains case, however, greatest number "is ensuing election." §15451 1996).2 4 Petitioners this four parties-the Libertarian California, Peace Freedom Party-each rule prohibiting primary.3 brought Eastern Secretary State, seeking declaratory injunctive relief. group Primary, respondent, intervened defendant. recognized law inject numbers 984 F. 1288, 1298-1299 (1997). might selection select, least cause same commit himself positions. Id., 1299. Nevertheless, one, interests ultimately reducing this: "enhanc[ing] democratic nature representativeness officials." 1301. Circuit, adopting Court's own, 646 (1999). We granted certiorari. 528 1133 (2000). II 5 rest defense upon proposition primaries integral citizens' officials. As consequence, contend, rather private proceedings, 198, respondents conclude, simply pedestrian example system elections. 6 recognized, course, primaries. Burdick Takushi, 504 428, 433 (1992); 217 (1986). considered "too plain argument," example, require format selecting assure intraparty competition resolved fashion. American Tex. White, 415 767, 781 (1974); 237 (Scalia, dissenting). Similarly, avoid burdening frivolous candidacies, demonstrate "a modicum support" allowing place ballot. Jenness Fortson, 403 431, 442 (1971). Finally, prevent "party raiding"-a dedicated formally switch another alter outcome primary-a registration reasonable period time Rosario Rockefeller, 410 752 (1973). Cf. Kusper Pontikes, 414 51 (1973) (23-month waiting unreasonable). 7 What we held, are, it, freely.4 continually stressed Constitution. 214 (1989); 107 (1981). regard, 649 (1944), 461 (1953), misplaced. invalidated Texas Party's limiting participation whites; Terry, promulgated Jaybird Association, "self-governing voluntary club," U.S., 463. These cases "endorses, adopts enforces discrimination Negroes," (or, organizations "part parcel" 482 (Clark, concurring)) bring process-so 664; 484 concurring); 469 (opinion Black, J.). do stand protections-and our later holdings make entirely clear.5 supra. 8 Representative democracy populous unit governance unimaginable without ability formation national almost concurrent Republic itself. Cunningham, Jeffersonian History Political Parties 239, 241 (A. Schlesinger ed., 1973). Consistent tradition, "the furtherance beliefs," "necessarily people only," say, corollary associate associate. " `Freedom prove empty guarantee if could control decisions share persuasions underlie being.' 122, n. 22 (quoting L. Tribe, Constitutional Law 791 (1978)). Roberts Jaycees, 468 609, 623 (1984). 9 nominee. issues day, even predetermined 372 (1997) (Stevens, dissenting) ("But choice communicate represents and, thereby, attract support"). Some parties-such President Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose Follette Progressives 1924, Henry Wallace 1948, George Independent 1968-are virtually inseparable (and tend outlast them). generally E. Kruschke, Encyclopedia Third (1991). 10 Unsurprisingly, vigorously affirm for, protection accords, "select[s] standard bearer best ideologies preferences." 224 (internal quotation marks omitted). said, power community." 216; 235-236 ("The unquestionably implicates freedom"); Timmons, 359 ("[T]he someone else, bearer" omitted)); 371 constitutional office"). 11 conducted open presidential preference primary.6 Although did delegates National Convention directly-they were chosen caucuses members-Wisconsin required accord results. Thus nonparty participate conflicted rules. whatever strength supporting itself, justify "substantial Party."7 126. 12 set forth cases. with-to positions, determined by-those who, best, refused affiliate worst, expressly rival. respect, qualitatively quite easy change day thus, some sense, "cross over," become member party; once does so, party.8 13 evidence demonstrates prospect having adherents opposing far remote-indeed, clear present danger. For 1997 survey 37 Republicans said planned 1998 gubernatorial 20 Democrats Senate Tr. 668-669. Those figures comparable results studies expert testified, Washington crossing rise high 25 percent, 511, 33 all themselves throughout ballot, 136. impact much minor such Party. first following implementation total cast races double registered members. Statement Vote, Election, 2, 1998, http://primary98.ss.ca.gov/Final/ Official-Results.htm; Re-port Registration, May http://www.ss.ca.gov/ elections/elections-u.htm. 14 record supports obvious help diverge faithful. revealed significantly preferences between "crossed over" Pl. Exh. (Addendum Mervin Field Report). went so describe "inevitable [under 198] will circumstances give official designation who's preferred majority plurality members." 421 (expert testimony Bruce Cain). 15 concluding imposes severe, cited malicious crossover voting, raiding, slight, though "benevolent" significant, determinative small races.9 F.3d, 656-657. But single selected enough destroy 1860 election, opponents fledgling had been able pro-slavery Abraham Lincoln, coalition factions forming behind him disintegrated, endangering survival thwarting effort fill vacuum left dissolution Whigs. generally, & Elections States: An 398-408, 587 (L. Maisel ed. 1991). Ordinarily, being saddled unwanted, possibly antithetical, severely transform it. "[R]egulating identity leaders," "may color message interfere means message." 231, 21. 16 event, deleterious effects altering Even person favored prevails, prevailed taking somewhat positions-and, should elected, continue take renominated. concluded, "[t]he Members Congress states moderate, both absolute sense relative reflective mass center ideological spectrum." 109 report Elisabeth R. Gerber). unnecessary cumulate phenomenon, since, after all, whole purpose favor "moderate" 89. encourages candidates-and officeholders hope renominated- curry whose "centrist" base. effect, moved step earlier expense perform "basic function" leaders. Kusper, 58. 17 Nor accept Appeals' contention endorse financially support 659. leadership substitute members' party-leadership endorsements always effective-for instance, York's 1982 Edward Koch, leadership's lost out Mario Cuomo. 228, 18. study moreover, leadership-endorsed won, effect endorsement negligible. Ibid. (citing O. T. 1988, 87-1269, pp. 97-98). primary; expect less where many unconnected assist rank file, agree leadership, want decided outsiders. 18 similarly unconvinced claim engaging fully traditional behavior, orderly governance, maintaining discipline legislature, conducting campaigns. accuracy assertion highly questionable, activities. equally observant procedures respectful depends faithful seems us improbable. suggest assert `will lead representative `problem solvers' beholden officials.' Brief 41 (emphasis added) 661). end, activities beside point. consistently overlook restriction activity leaves unimpaired. Spence 418 405, 411, (1974) (per curiam); There candidates. 19 sum, process-the function party," ibid.-by think freedom. therefore 358 ("Regulations imposing burdens [parties'] advance interest"). turn. III proffer compelling. Two them-producing concerns-are circumlocution producing devices. Indeed, admit much. substantiating "representativeness," point fact "officials closer median districts" 40. And explaining desire increase debate, reconsider long standing since "compels [their] larger segment electorate." 46. Both supposed interests, therefore, reduce nothing stark repudiation association: taken congenial majority. 21 inadmissibility sort "interest" before. Hurley Irish-American Gay, Lesbian Bisexual Group Boston, Inc., 515 557 (1995), South Boston Allied War Veterans Council allow organization openly gay, lesbian, bisexual (GLIB) council's annual St. Patrick's Day parade. GLIB sued council Massachusetts' accommodation claiming impermissibly denied them account sexual orientation. After noting parades expressive endeavors, rejected GLIB's overrode content Applying circumstances, apparent "object [was] speakers modify expression extent beneficiaries messages own. [I]n absence further, legitimate object merely exactly speaker's autonomy forbids." 578. Respondents' third asserted ensure vote. By "disenfranchised," mean cannot vote; independents minority "safe" districts. disenfranchised, according respondents, unable amounts election-the "effective" force appears reformulation already rejected-recharacterizing keen "disenfranchisement" fulfilled. "nonmember's overborne countervailing membership qualifications." 215-216, (1973), Nader Schaffer, 417 837 (Conn.), summarily aff'd, 429 989 (1976)). weighty Moreover, accurate plight non-party-member safe district "disenfranchisement," needed solve problem. feels put hard state-imposed whereas theirs. 23 remaining interests-promoting privacy-are not, like others, automatically running; neither they, determination abstract, asking privacy, etc., values; aspect addressed issue significant. find be. 24 fairness presumably inequity permitting districts If unfair (rather consequence eminently principle that-except imperatives intervene-the rules), hijack net scheme-indeed, avowed purpose-is assuring range "centrist." well described broadening choices majority-but hardly interest, indeed one. just variation theme (more produce suffers defect. privacy: specific privacy confidentiality medical records personal finances, one's affiliation. (as unlikely) scheme administering devised declaration information, piece information conceivably "compelling" sacrosanct, statutes condition appointment certain 47 U.S.C. § 154(b)(5) ("[M]aximum commissioners [of Federal Communications Commission] equal constitutes full Commission"); 396(c)(1) (1994 III) (no five Board Directors Corporation Public Broadcasting party); 42 2000e-4(a) Equal Employment Opportunity Commission party). observe ones, furthering protect resorting nonpartisan Generally speaking, qualifications requires ballot-which include established voter-petition requirements voter, affiliation, then candidate, top getters (or however prescribes) move characteristics save constitutionally one: increased "privacy," "fairness"-all 26 27 inherently incompatible. forcing beliefs. done "crucial juncture" traditionally collective voice spokesman. places unnecessary. judgment Appeals 28 ordered. Notes A meets conditions: (1) last polled (2) preceding election; (3) numbering sign petition stating intend form §5100 2000). apply directly apportionment delegates. §§15151, 15375, 15500 Instead, tabulates ways: entire pool amount latter figure apportion central committee members; suit. Since time, apparently status. Child '60s Slips, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 17, 1999, p. B-6). On point, dissent shares view, state-run associate, says, inapplicable "[A]n unlike convention caucus, affair." Post, Of course is, affair well, discussed text demonstrate, composing disregarded. wrong conclude Allwright protections affords encompass state-required, state-financed citation exclusion proscription. closest comes identifying proscription reference interests" belong, "fundamental right" "to meaningful choice." 13. latter: Selecting choice. really context, permissible required, believes. falls short right, fairly characterized "desire"-and basis disregarding exclude. infra, 16. differs although person, Governor attorney general. dissent, attempting fashion rule-that exist respect elections, post, 6-rewrites (1981), "defin[e] composition governing units," 3. fact, `intrusion adverse principles' (in nominee). 122 Ray Blair, 343 154, 221-222 (1952) curiam)). 125 (comparing created "imposition upon" delegates). involved regulation factor affected weight bearing existence vel non 121-122, 125-126. Stevens considers interpretation "specious", 4, 3, subscribed himself. His dismissing appeals Bellotti Connolly thusly: "There Wisconsin's requirement Presidential nominating convention, voters, accordance advanced Party- . drawn decisionmaking thereby distorted." 460 1057, 1062-1063 (1983) original). Not dissent's conflict precedents, leads nonsensical 208 (1986), invite Combining affirms outsiders candidates, denies reserve thus lose identity, preserve distinct 6, 130, (Powell, situation `blanket' primaries-i.e., allowed occasion, wish individual constitutionality defined "who registered. Thus, cross-over competing party." 656 29 concurring. 30 product popular initiative, strong recent electorate. designed, part, widening base few weeks days pay little attention campaigns details politics. Fewer still direction consider dynamics remote, partisan, slight conditions disinterested, refrain altogether. correct this, seeks responsive whole. efficacy solution, participation. 45-46. 31 Encouraging legitimate, essential, objective; preserved strong, participatory short, law; I close elections fair matters purely structure. 32 true doing, doctrinal position issues. Ante, 14. From outset candid operation law. 40, organized controlled-in perception-by activists self-interest enhance term support, shortsighted insensitive served broader appeal. Amendment's speech through resolve, State. shared belief, speak When direct changes philosophy unwanted wresting moderation partisanship away incursion careful scrutiny reasons add separate concurrence say doubtful reason. justification statute tells hand freedoms. contends, funds resources defending advising preference. begin with, meet objection, explains. additional reason denial spending cooperation Colorado Campaign Comm. Election Comm'n, 518 604 (1996), Government using very remedy offers defend 34 campaign finance laws strict manner undertake aid particular relevance coordinated expenditures, Act 1971 deems contributions monetary restrictions. 90 Stat. 488, 441a(a)(7)(B)(i) ("[E]xpenditures cooperation, consultation, concert, request suggestion of, authorized committees, agents, contribution candidate"). Though expenditures Republican, principal placed expenditures. 624-625 Justices "all money spent secure candidate" upheld applied case. 648 subscribe spends collaboration office. 35 my stated 626 part), Nixon Shrink Missouri PAC, ---, --- (2000) (dissenting opinion), deprive Our exercise speech, protection. practical during unfortunate remit indirect covert thought expression. perversion warp honest, straightforward exemplified vigorous soft advocacy escape burdensome regime otherwise limited-the structure Buckley Valeo, 424 (1976) curiam)-restricting spend violation 36 Were uphold limitations prevailing vital points First, mandate weaken maintain Second, impose restrictions efforts counteract intervention. words, injury ruling compounded prevail instant shape doctrine manipulation. society directed doctrine, around. With observations, 38 whom Ginsburg joins I, dissenting. 39 Today construes limitation broaden holding novel judgment, plainly wrong. am convinced adoption pursuant violate Amendment, offices valid. application Senators Representatives, raises difficult Clause Art. §4, cl. 1. explain disagreement resolution comment issue. 40 how quintessential attribute sovereignty. about decide conducted, paid State.1 constraints States' polls, never suggested authorize federalism approving instituted abridge views." 6.2 contrary conclusion rests premise includes "right associate," turn participating 6-7. drawing conclusion, blurs distinctions critical: distinction organization's define itself messages, hand, obligations organiza- tions performing functions, other; encourage defines units, decides endorse, public, engaged kind protects. 354-355, (recognizing standard-bearer context primary); dissenting); 124 (1981) ("A various ways determining makeup delegation protected Constitution"); Cousins Wigoda, 419 477, 491 (1975) ("Illinois' integrity electoral deemed Convention" added)).3 could, chose adopt platform advocating white supremacy non-Caucasians. oratorical skills loyal racist permitted conventions caucuses, adhere line. 43 Judge Levi correctly observed nor comprehensive enjoyed associations. 654-655 (1999); cf. 360 (concluding while core activities, not); 120-121 (noting correct" unconstitutionally infringed 131-132 lack orientation mission). clear-though Court-"that nominees." 4. freedoms forms action.4 organization-whether calls "Jaybird" association-may deny non-Caucasians nominees. (1953); 663-664 (1944). "do [wholly] protections." 6. do, affairs," action.5 "internal processes" ibid., 44 associate" relies upon, then, refuse non-members affairs;6 infringe principle. 2-3, 2. affair. extended primaries, eligible rules abridging closely scrutinized,7 inhibit acting state-run, acts expand individuals foe friend ally. 45 understand state-regulated Marchioro Chaney, 191, 199 (1979) ("There complaint [a] [First Amendment] govern substantially burdened [state regulation] source decision confer critical authority [party regulated]"); ("It understanding why candidates] [rather primary] proscribed [by State], cannot"). ought enable insist caucus excluded. real world, anyone "join" appropriate (at most) registering state-defined past history race, religion, gender provide refusal "associate" unwelcome member. 655, 20. mismatch "not turns timing associate's membership. 133 ("As [shortly election] [that] difference loses significance"). 46 conduct inevitably either draw unprincipled configurations practices fundamental ways. Assuming Democrat wants pretty feeble cost loss non-Republican ante, 10, 8. Subtle import grist legislatures, demean adjudication. Or, matter Tashjian: "The steadfastly refusing casts [a non-closed] `association' responds questions pollster. concept casual contacts, ceases analytic use." 235. 48 noteworthy bylaws unequivocally only. 7, 15, 16, reasoning, seem follow anything face necessarily `freedom association.' Given supported essentially disparages today "narrow" 14-18, surely danger fare challenge have. 49 count, presently semi-closed participate. 650. willingness invalidate schemes serious doubt others behest rightly observed, "an extraordinary complex remove[s] method beneficial uncertain future importance." 654.8 50 putatively dictate organizational visions makes work-party versus progressive inclusion officials-that litigants O'Callaghan 914 P.2d 1250, 1263 (Alaska 222-223; Luther Borden, How. 1, 40-42 (1849). belongs people. Term Limits, Inc. Thornton, 514 779, 795 (1995). review evaluation stake seriously flawed. bearers appear borne experience Alaska Washington. 656-659, 23. Court" disclosed "clear danger" 10. hyperbole based liberal view appellate role, factual findings. Following bench trial receipt witness reports, found "there raiding party] unanimity scientists called experts plaintiffs defendants." 656. While test finding making examination record, cites-including 10-11, record-does come demonstrating clearly erroneous. Bose Corp. Consumers Union 466 485, 498-501 52 concern benevolent impinges 11, "suggest[ed] rarely typical contest higher levels states." 657. empirically debatable assumption opposed nominally brief pre-registration requirement, too thin reed credible distinction. 219 (rejecting keeping curtail given easily cross members). 53 side balance, "substantial, compelling," did, fostering government "[i]ncreasing officials, giving turnout [electoral processes]." 662;9 364 ("[W]e [do not] elaborate, empirical verification weightiness justifications"). glib rejection particularly regrettable. era dramatically declining experiment reforms designed robust involving Opening encouraging draws achieving goal. presented showed states); (Kennedy, concurring). process,10 445 (1992) dissenting), 60% voters-including Republicans-for 649; 236 (preferring rank-and-file so). rely combination deciding strange forecloses decision. 54 provides Places Manner prescribed Legislature thereof" added). broad grant legislatures "matched offices." 217. believe proper powers system. initiative. relevant offices, unclear legislature insofar applies electing Representatives. 55 empowers propose reject §8. approved "initiative statutes" immediately amended repealed consent. §10. amendments voters' March statute. 56 suggests regarding unreviewable legislative valid exercising vests "Legislature[s]." argued reasoning vested -, referendum." §1. vicissitudes nomenclature, meaning House Representatives analogous Clause's Legislature" "legislative State."11 classification voter-approved initiatives render Clause. Arguably, invalid. raised courts below, believe, importance merits attention. 57 58 excellent respectfully dissent. (1986) (observing grants prescribe matched offices). administers provisions supervisory county officers. Govt. §12172.5 1992 administered primarily governments. §§13000-13001 Anecdotal (whether general) costs governmental units $45 million $50 million. Prominent founding generation disagreed "unimaginable" anti-party proved inconsistent actions. Hofstadter, Idea System 2-3 (1969) creators sides, Federalists Republicans, men looked sores body politic"). At viewed unavoidable evil endured, abolished suppressed. 16-17, 24. ranked list evils check. 53; Federalist (J. Madison). specious. 8-9, (claiming actually primary). characterization Follette's provided Powell: "In analyzing treats equivalent delegate selection, relying 477 (1975), concludes interference accepted delegate-selection rights." 128 opinion). characterize casting 121 (majority opinion) "whether compel seat Party"). characterizes "impos[ing] requirements" delegates, 125, processes, State-mandated implicate intrudes level types mentioned outweighed Connolly, 1062-1063, (quoted part 9, 7). seek level. serves essential "[a]s matter, ultimate nominations parties] made." Morse Va., 517 186, 205-206 (1996) J.); Classic, 313 299, 319 (1941). Contrary think, argument Protection (though out). 5. Rather, cite recognition proscriptions illustrates primaries-as parts government-are affairs. asserts preserving overall providing secrecy preventing harassment voters. go primary-not imposition eventually delegates." 124-125. 370 (general restriction); Bullock Carter, 405 134 (1972) (primary restriction). coupled implications. arguable combined options consent are: "nonpartisan primary"-a used Louisiana-in previously nominated compete. practice "primary" common, all. runoff benefits democratizing led declare `too argument.' 4; Lightfoot 964 F.2d 865, 872-873 (CA9 1992) (explaining requiring concurrence, Kennedy argues somehow irrevocably taints balancing relied 14, analysis. myriad weigh ask justifies right; end 135-136 (discussing nonmembers' coincided interests); 1062 voters). Baldwin Trowbridge, Bartlett Contested Cases, H. Misc. Doc. 152, 41st Cong., 2d Sess., 46, (1866) ("[Under Clause,] conferred legislature. meant `the legislature?' Does eo nomine, country? [C]ommittee Representatives] construction").

Category: 1