Lawsuit Says N.J. Secretary of State Using Taxes for Private Benefit

Published: 17 Dec, 2014
4 min read

Appellants in the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the New Jersey primary structure filed a reply to the secretary of state’s opposition brief with the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday. The EndPartisanship.org coalition reasserts its argument that because primary elections are an integral stage of the public election process, the state has an obligation to protect every voter’s fundamental right to equal and meaningful participation.

Since March, when the EndPartisanship.org coalition (along with registered Republicans, Democrats, and independent voters in New Jersey) filed the lawsuit, the secretary of state has argued that the plaintiffs are trying to force the state to allow nonmembers access to the private nomination proceedings of the Republican and Democratic parties.

However, at no point in the last 9 months has the coalition argued that the Constitution entitles voters participation rights in the private nomination proceedings of political organizations or that the state should force parties to open their doors to nonmembers.

“Appellants are not seeking to participate in the nomination of a political party’s candidates,” the reply states. “Rather, Appellants are asking the state to respect their right to participate in the state’s election process on an equal footing as political parties and their members."

Though primary elections are pivotal in electing candidates, approximately 48 percent of New Jersey voters are denied access to them, giving the Republican and Democratic parties — two private organizations — an unfair advantage in elections.

nj-primary-election

For those who have not followed the progress of the lawsuit to date, a district court judge in Newark ruled in favor of the state in August, citing the defendant’s argument that the lawsuit “proceeds from the premise that all registered voters have a fundamental right to vote in the primary election conducted by political parties they are not members of.”

In November, the coalition appealed the ruling to the Third Circuit.

In her opposition to the appeal, Secretary of State Kim Guadagno argues that unaffiliated voters do not have a fundamental right to participate in state-funded primary elections, even if those elections are an integral stage of the elections process.

“[N]either this court nor the Supreme Court has recognized that unaffiliated voters have a fundamental right to participate in primary elections even when those elections are an integral part of the electoral process,” she argues.

IVP Donate

Later in the brief, the state admits that “it is beyond cavil that ‘voting is of the most fundamental significance under our constitutional structure.’” (quoting Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 433 (1992) (quoting Illinois Bd. of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173, 184 (1979).)

Yet, the state goes on to argue that the right to participate is conditioned on joining one of two private organizations. This argument seems to contradict the concept of a fundamental right.

“The fundamental right to vote, by its very nature, is a nonpartisan right,” appellants argues in their reply.

A fundamental right, like the right to vote, cannot come with such caveats that require voters to join a private organization like a political party before they can exercise this right.

Appellants further argue that the secretary of state cannot “articulate a legitimate public interest” to justify her arguments and she says she doesn’t have to because the party registration burden is not great enough.

[I]f voting is of such fundamental significance (OB 7), as well as the right to not associate (OB 10), how can the exercise of one fundamental right be conditioned on the forfeiture of another, yet characterized as a minimal burden?  - Appellants' reply to the Opposition to Appeal

Very few would argue against the claim that primaries are an integral stage of the election process. The state does not even provide an argument against this claim. In New Jersey alone, only one congressional race every election cycle is considered even remotely competitive in the general election, meaning nearly every race is decided after the primary stage.

Yet, nearly half of New Jersey voters are denied full access to the public election process unless they sacrifice their constitutionally-protected right to non-association. Further, because of current election law and heavily gerrymandered districts, a majority of voters (regardless of political persuasion) are denied an equal voice in who represents them at the state and federal levels of government.

Read all motions and court filings in the New Jersey lawsuit on Independent Voter Project's website.

Let Us Vote : Sign Now!

You Might Also Like

Judge Slams Door on New Attack Against California’s Top Two Primary
Judge Slams Door on New Attack Against California’s Top Two Primary
A group of minor parties in California challenged the state's nonpartisan Top Two primary in court and a federal judge handed them another loss, ruling in part that they can’t keep suing over arguments already rejected by other courts....
15 Apr, 2026
-
4 min read
Can Buffalo Succeed Where NYC Failed on Election Reform?
Can Buffalo Succeed Where NYC Failed on Election Reform?
The Buffalo Charter Revision Commission voted 7-2 Monday to pass a resolution that ensures it will explore open primaries, ranked choice voting (RCV), and expanded ballot access. It is not a guarantee on any reform, but it is a step closer to change....
14 Apr, 2026
-
6 min read
Why Trump Really Hates Alaska's Ranked Choice Voting
Why Trump Really Hates Alaska's Ranked Choice Voting
President Trump called Alaska's ranked choice voting system "disastrous" and "very fraudulent" on Friday. He gave his "complete and total support" to the repeal effort heading to Alaska's 2026 ballot....
13 Apr, 2026
-
6 min read
Michigan GOP Kicks Out RCV Advocates, Calls Them ‘Communists’ over Reform Republicans Use
Michigan GOP Kicks Out RCV Advocates, Calls Them ‘Communists’ over Reform Republicans Use
On March 28, the ranked choice voting advocacy group, Rank MI Vote was kicked out of the Michigan Republican Party Convention. Reports say one Republican state lawmaker called volunteers “communists” and even threatened physical violence....
06 Apr, 2026
-
14 min read
Democracy Reformers Admit Their Biggest Problem: They Keep Talking to Themselves
Democracy Reformers Admit Their Biggest Problem: They Keep Talking to Themselves
At the March 25 Democracy Network Exchange meeting, reform advocates confronting 2024 losses on ranked choice voting and other ballot measures pointed to a hard truth: insider language, weak grassroots investment, and abstract messaging are still undermining structural reform campaigns. ...
31 Mar, 2026
-
5 min read
Can a Party Call Itself ‘Independent’? Judge Accuses No Labels Party of ‘Bait-and-Switch’
Can a Party Call Itself ‘Independent’? Judge Accuses No Labels Party of ‘Bait-and-Switch’
The No Labels Party in Arizona cannot change its name to the Arizona Independent Party. This is the decision from Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Gregory Como, who called it a “political bait-and-switch.” ...
30 Mar, 2026
-
12 min read