Document: 415 U.S. 767 94 S.Ct. 1296 39 L.Ed.2d 744 AMERICAN PARTY OF TEXAS et al., Appellants,v.Mark WHITE, Jr., Secretary of State Texas. Robert HAINSWORTH, Appellant, v. Mark Nos. 72—887, 72—942. Argued Nov. 5, 1973. Decided March 26, 1974. Rehearing Denied May 13, See 416 1000, 2414. Syllabus Texas laws involved in this litigation provide four methods for nominating candidates a general election: (1) parties whose gubernatorial choice polled more than 200,000 votes the last election are nominated by primary only, and nominees these automatically appear on ballot; (2) poll less votes, but 2% total vote cast governor that or conventions; (3) if foregoing procedures do not apply, precinct conventions can, pursuant to Tex. Election Code, Art. 13.45(2) (Supp.1973), nominate party is able, notarized signatures, evidence support at least 1% preceding (by process be completed within 55 days after election) can produce sufficient supplemental petitions with signatures (not including voters who have already participated any other party's process) make up combined 1%; (4) under Arts. 13.50 13.51, an independent candidate, regardless office sought, qualify filing time prescribed petition signed certain percentage specified locality, percentages varying offices sought (in case 3% congressional district 5% Representative's district). In no event, 500 required candidate 'district office.' No voter, participating political signing same office, may sign independent's petition. Appellants, minority their supporters, unaffiliated candidates, brought actions District Court seeking declaratory injunctive relief against enforcement laws, which they claimed infringed associational rights First Fourteenth Amendments were invidiously discriminatory. They also challenged practice printing absentee ballots only names two major State's failure require candidates' exclusion from benefits McKool-Stroud Primary Financing Law 1972, provided public financing state revenues elections casting governor. The upheld constitutionality scheme. Held: 1. Article 13.45(2), does freeze status quo affords real essentially equal opportunity ballot qualification, contravene furtherance compelling interest. Storer Brown, 724, 1274, 714. Pp. 776—788. (a) Equal Protection Clause forbid requirement small proceed convention rather election. has been shown here burdensome election, followed runoff where necessary. 781—782. (b) So long as larger must demonstrate voter it invidious smaller (which need such demonstration) establish position otherwise; appellant able meet) imposes insurmountable obstacle party. 782—784. (c) bar person's voted unconstitutional, since he choose petition, both. Nor disqualify those another its offices, had access entire electorate commit day. Cf. Rosario Rockefeller, 410 752, 93 1245, 36 785—786. (d) 55-day period provides circulating unduly burdensome, nor notarization requirement. 786—787. 2. provisions 13.51 500-signature feature burdensome. Requiring 'significant modicum support' record devoid proof claims (who relied solely minimal 500-vote-signature requirement) requirements impermissibly onerous. 788—791. 3. designed compensate expenses alone subject; and, correctly found, 'the procedure available new carries none expensive burdening conduct primaries.' Moreover, obliged finance efforts every nascent group placement, like American Party, failed ballot. 791—794. 4. erred sustaining justification was offered appellees giving placement Socialist Workers satisfied statutory demonstrating necessary community needed win candidates. Goosby Osser, 409 512, 854, 35 36; O'Brien Skinner, 414 524, 740, 38 702. 794—795. No. 72—942, affirmed; 349 F.Supp. 1272, affirmed part, vacated remanded part. Gloria T. Svanas, Odessa, Tex., appellants 72—887. W. Hainsworth, Houston, 72 942, pro se. John L. Hill, Austin, appellee. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 These cases began when appellants, qualified supporting separate United States Western various sections Code. 2 Party 1972 slate statewide local officers, county commissioner.1 New wanted recognition governor, Congress, representative sheriff. made similar respect lieutenant Senator.2 Laurel Dunn, nonpartisan attempted run House Representatives Eleventh Congressional District. his action, represented himself named offices. Finally, Hainsworth 86. 3 actions, alleged that, excluding ballot, Code Amendment right associate advancement beliefs discriminated parties, well Appellants enjoin forthcoming November law 1972. individual involving 72—887 consolidated, three-judge convened. Following trial, denied all holding totality, served interest did suffocate process. Raza Unida Bullock, 1272 (WD Tex.1972). subsequently grounds. Two appeals taken, we noted probable jurisdiction. 965, 1442, 700. We affirm judgment except latter relates Texas' provisions. 4 * established detailed scheme regulating qualifying participation electoral Under case, election.3 5 Candidates Tex.Election 13.02 (1967).4 holds first Saturday May, June, should garner majority. 13.03 (1967). 6 thereby conventions. 13.45(1) (Supp.1973).5 held sequentially, date primaries (the May), following Saturday, second June. 13.47 (Supp.1974); 13.48 7 Because pursue third method qualification: evidenced conventions, circulation signatures. (Supp.1973).6 8 Dunn could fixed written application relevant 13.50, (1967).7 II 9 consider supporters. (Supp.1973) validity issue here, requires applies through precinct, county, persons numbering number approximately 22,000 electors. opportunities satisfy signature At statutorily mandated day primary, prepare list participants, voters, along pertinent information. forwarded 20 convention. If reveals imposed upon will certify entitled placed 10 Should obtain requisite participation, circulated signature. When addition lists 1%, qualifies Approximately allotted supplementation A ineligible Furthermore, each signatory administered oath qualification proceedings. notarized. 11 secure 2,732 By deadline petitions, risen 7,828, far short over Brief 2—3.8 apparently effort comply requirement.9 relatively however, plaintiffs litigation, La complied 12 challenge aspects system interact other: apparatus, preprimary ban circulation, disqualification process, limitation securing requirement.10 assert preconditions impermissible burdens secured violate discriminations parties. 13 concluded without merit. agree whether qualifications viewed substantial polling vote, depends further interests, U.S., 729—733, S.Ct., 1278—1281.11 But limitations, considered combination, constitutionally valid measures, reasonably taken pursuit vital objectives cannot equally significantly ways. 14 It too plain argument, contested limit one insist intraparty competition settled before 733—736, 1280—1282. Neither take seriously suggestion insisting nominations convention, arguments presented, wholly unpersuaded necessary, particularly party, elections, hold adopt promulgate platforms business.12 claiming protection violation, appellants' burden instance discrimination them some substance. 'Statutes create many classifications deny protection; 'invidious discrimination' offends Constitution.' Ferguson Skrupa, 372 726, 732, 83 1028, 1032, (1963) (footnote omitted). Appellants' mere assertions permitted different, necessarily preference other.13 15 To position, subject electors question file supporters none. think admittedly interests14 sufficiently implicated appearing significant, measurable quantum support. among whereas not, latter, being treated, manner. Of course, what demanded so excessive impractical reality device always, almost exclude significant Constitution real, 'merely theoretical.' Jenness Fortson, 403 431, 439, 91 1970, 1974 (1971). 16 recognized arbitrary, measure support—1% signatures—falls outer boundaries according position.15 degree either impossible impractical, unwilling assume substantially greater hardship ballot.16 very Act. therefore, immediately obvious face operates practice, obstacles fledgling generate allowed. 17 aspiring free campaign compete Any however registered, attend counted toward level. Unlike law, see infra 788, California counterpart, 738, 1283, wait until crystallize voters. count noses day, just votes. fall magic figure, chance—they shortage beginning ending 120 prior 18 true juncture pool possible severely reduced, anyone voting just-completed longer requesting petitioning listed attack restriction, but, such, nothing prohibition elector's particular office. Electors primary; apparent us why get demonstrated seeks fill. Jackson Ogilvie, 325 864, 867 (ND Ill.), aff'd 925, 2247, 29 705 (1971), aptly characterized situation upholding provision preventing both petition: 19 'Thus, state's attempts ensure elector fact exercise franchise. He ways.'17 previously protect integrity waiting periods themselves change registration participate primary. (1973). Kusper Pontikes, 51, 303, 260 Likewise, seems determine essential confine course where, disqualifying 21 petitions. Given span, would obtained rate 400 per 22,000, 100 canvassers—only half always completely precise satisfactory barometer actual never impossible. Blumstein, 405 330, 360, 92 995, 1012 (1972). Hard work sacrifice dedicated volunteers lifeblood organization. Constitutional adjudication common sense war other, thus unimpressed onerous, especially original requirements.18 22 there remains facet evidencing originating object requirement, little impracticability unusually determined indicating plaintiff conceded much. found alternative enforce prevent crossing twice On us, disagree. 23 sum, 'in way freezes quo, implicitly recognizes potential fluidity life.' 1975. qualification. more. III 24 govern eligibility position. Regardless file, 30 vary sought. equaling 1970 desired run; Representatives, locality. states event office,' were,19 barred nomination Each candidate's subscribe declaring nonparticipation 13.51. 25 contend Amendments, Clause, impose conditions principle unexceptionable, cf. 739, 746, 1284, 1286; requiring support'20 unconstitutional. Demanding invalid face, supra, argument statute approaches frivolous. 26 theory least, consequence restriction eligible signers calculated subtracting then adding registrations closing books, reduced nearly zero few even undertaking. likelihood remote, say likely percentage, perhaps 25%, registered turn out petitions,21 registrants books indicates districts showing suggesting size might be. As noted, presented 'absolutely factual basis claims' requirements. F.Supp., 1284. This simply proof, reason Court's judgments appellants.22 IV 27 response decision Bullock Carter, 134, 849, 31 (1972), invalidating filing-fee requirements, legislature enacted temporary 13.08c—1.23 generally precluded payment funds minor reimburse costs incurred conducting processes.24 all, $3,000,000 appropriated defray connection elections. 19—20, n. 41. 28 rejected constitutional challenges noting '(t)he primaries,' 1285. emphasized Carter necessitate defining financial aid invite charges discrimination, pointed received said '(w)e persuaded faced task distinguishing between purpose 147, 858.25 All desire See, e.g., 13.33, 13.34, 13.35, 13.38, 13.45, 13,45a, (1967, Supp.1973, Supp.1974). reimburses carrying procedures. understand it, expense defrays whole shows, reimbursed primaries. undergo expense, sure, accumulating refusal is, denial meaning Amendment. unconvinced, based facts presently available, 'exclusionary mechanism' 'tends choosing' 'a appreciable impact franchise.' 144, 856. point mounts law. State, because organize itself unsuccessfully attempting place V 5.05 (Supp.1974) otherwise personal appearance clerk's mail. print major, Democrats Republicans. 1283—1284. 32 sustained relying presumption McDonald Board Comm'rs, 394 802, 89 1404, 739 (1969), rationality incurring appellant, unavailability obviously difference treatment Court, brief oral justify discrimination. 33 Comm'rs dealt availability (1973); L.Ed. 702 (1974). From permitting classes denying privilege circumstances, affording comparable means arbitrary violative Clause. Plainly, employed erroneous standard judging applied case. therefore vacate remand consideration light Osser Skinner. respects, affirmed, 34 Affirmed DOUGLAS, dissenting While I aspect cases, dissent main issue. involve dismissal relating that: 37 'While Supreme delineated extreme end spectrum combinations restrictions unconstitutionally impede (Williams Rhodes, 393 23, (1968)), (Jenness 554 (1971)), presents combination falls squarely middle.' 1275—1276 (W.D.Tex.1972). hurdles facing set compared my restraining order 803, 25, 63.1 'We (403 U.S.) 438 (91 1970), 'Georgia's unlike Ohio's, operate quo.' Texas, though severe Ohio, works direction. me, prima facie, unorthodox group. 40 'Perhaps full dispel doubts. strong grant requested stay . ..' Id., 806, 27. 41 Oral For reasons stated believe totality unconstitutional 42 An analysis leads me conclusion.2 reviewed Jenness, six months question. ranges, 50 required; gather them. others. Here candidate. thereafter fully independents allowed seek primaries, application. notarized, here. 43 Georgia 'has insulated single appeal voices borders.' 442, 1976. independent, 'draw (his) ranks (are) unable parties.' leave 'be content left-overs ballot.' Ibid. Although retrospective affect outcome, moot. 756 1249, 737 8, 1282, dismissed complaints Unida, insofar V.A.T.S., lacked standing view later certification appellee 1276 (W.D.Tex.1972) appealed although 13.45(2). dismissal, go beyond privileges it. Both issues Jurisdictional Statement filed themes Party's merits. allows write-in most counted. 6.05, 6.06 (Supp.1974). 'On 1952 years thereafter, Governor chosen Congress comprising organized hundred thousand (200,000) shall, together filled portion party.' describe existed pending Legislature amended extent mandatory resulting automatic now triggered casts 20%, previous counsel maintained raised figure 20% Counsel intimated changed again fulfill Tr. Arg. 7—8. Whatever merits, reach contentions. revolve principally around unaffected above amendment referred infra. 'Any nominee percent accordance rules code, election; (Arts. 13.48).' (Supp.1973). During pendency Legislature, Act amending 13.02, 13.45(1). Starting 1976, receiving continue existing 13.48), printed secretary state, participants 13.45a 13.47) certified chairman respective listing names, addresses (including street address post-office address), certificate numbers attending aggregate number, additional signer shall person who, during year, signs oath, writing attached 'I know contents _ next am constitution force, current year multiple parts. One officer administering apply whom administered. (Art. 13.03) code void. having guilty misdemeanor conviction fined $100 $500. 'The executive committee responsible forwarding state. 'At makes certifications clerks 1.03) subdivision directly unless certifies requirements.' name official column can- didates, addressed proper officer, herein provided, him thirty follows: 'If throughout cent State. composed three part five judge. 'Notwithstanding provisions, district, exceed hundred. 'No contain office; void applications. favor information it: tax receipt exemption issuance; exempt certificate, withdraw annul delivering (or filed, filed), request, duly acknowledged him, cancelled annulled. request acted on, Upon withdrawal, 'To citizen application, application: application; nominated, (here insert candidate) candidate; force own will.' administered.' Prior convening court, single-judge temporarily restrained refusing accept them, June 30, September 1, court-ordered period, garnered 17,678 bringing 25,000. 5. final order, dissolved declared gathered extended null 1286. subsequent 63 24. unrelated ballots. discussed separately Parts V, due grounds 13.47a(1) (1967) 13.12 declaration effect provision, restriction. arguing others distinguish contention overall fail Part opinion. readily concedes '(t)his identical prospective 13.12.' 7. one's candidacy. read merits challenging reasonableness three-month benchmark point. form goals kept off also, heavily burdened clamoring determining power unequal groups kind stake, decisions consistently 'only regulation regulate limiting freedoms.' NAACP Button, 371 415, 438, 328, 340—341, (1963).' Williams 31, 11, (1968). 56—59, 307—308, 13.37, 13.38 differences needs potentials historically broad support, hand, organization other. (A not) recognizing providing different routes Sometimes grossest lie treating things exactly alike, truism illustrated supra.' 441—442, concede, must, ostensibly viz., preservation avoid undue confusion, compelling. 18—19. 761, 1251; 345, 1004, 274 (1972); 145, 856 857, 32, 11. recently 1976: 'There surely important preliminary organization's ballot—the interest, avoiding deception, frustration democratic election.' balanced lenient thought somewhat whole, valid. Actually, save corresponds management internal affairs. indicated, appeal. reasonable argue Democratic Republican Parties circulate showing. doubt care forced 254 counties. 441, 1975—1976. newer counterparts, candidacy, results, like. ballot—statewide conventions—and problematical best onerous fact. note promote imbalance relative difficulty our attention matter, obligated allow decided legitimate compromised allowing Nothing decision, affirmative duty move freely reading becomes evident 864 Ill.1971), 705. Indeed, federal court familiar Ogilvie reflect views Moore Elections Columbia, 319 407 (DC 1970); Wood Putterman, 316 646 (Md.), aff'd, 859, 104, 99 (1970); 314 984 (SDNY), 65, (1970). terminates cut verify ballots, litigate challenges. 'second chance' 120-day pre-election neither unreasonable 14.01. 1976; 782. 25% approximation actually conservative projection. Voting statistics compiled Office indicate 2,306,910 2,036,770 January 3,872,462 Thus, accounting increased turnout ranged 60% 53%, respectively. conceivable raising higher disqualified peti- tions nevertheless high left insignificant Comparative suggest estimate modest. California, example, figures reveal past seven biennial elections: 1960 62.80% 1962 63.53% 1964 71.94% 1966 64.67% 1968 72.21% 62.23% 70.95% Vote, Consolidated Election, 6, p. presidential Florida Massachusetts witnessed 59% 56%, Quarterly 481, 862, 1655 realistic prospect postprimary much traditionally trailed behind national averages sizable margin. C. McCleskey, Government Politics (4th ed. 1972). notary shown, convinces notarial suspect 787. Since measure, legislation expired replaced legislation, Conduct 13.08c—2 schedule fees fee waived designated Those paid used pay expenses. remaining defrayed voucher appellants. predecessor recent amendments 4, funding. mooted controversy. correct deprived expenses, compel circumstances special nature short-term funding particular, evaluate virtue compulsory procedures, incur extraordinary costs, 12,000 sheets, 50% expenditures distributing, collecting, 'Appellants strenuously urge apportioning cost feasible bodies 'parties' sponsorship result seem overlook distinction embodied success supra. 858 select (Supp.1972). fielded mominate vote. S.B.No.11, 63d Regular Session, § (1973), quoted Supplemental Appendix 14—15. forth (1967): Acts 1951, 52nd Leg., 1097, ch. 492, art. 227; 1963, 58th 1017, 424, 104.'

Category: 1