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.”

IVP Donate

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.

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.

Let Us Vote : Sign Now!

[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.

You Might Also Like

Trump mad over Indiana gerrymander decision.
Trump Big Mad that Indiana Republicans Won’t Fight His Gerrymandering War
Things looked like they could get even more chaotic this week in the mid-cycle gerrymandering arms race between the two major parties as the Indiana Senate took up a new congressional map to give Republicans an even greater electoral advantage in the state. But Indiana Senate Republicans this week put their foot down and declared that they want no part in this race to the bottom....
12 Dec, 2025
-
13 min read
Andy Moore
Nonpartisan Reformers Unite: NANR Summit Charts Bold Path for Election Reform in 2026
The National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers (NANR) held its 9th annual summit in Miami this week following a year of political chaos and partisan machinations that put power before representation, accountability, and fairness....
05 Dec, 2025
-
12 min read
The Games Politicians Play After Voters Pass Election Reforms
The Games Politicians Play After Voters Pass Election Reforms
As IVN’s Shawn Griffiths travels to Miami to share hard-earned intel at the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers (NANR) conference, Chad and Cara focus on Washington, DC, where a 73 percent mandate for an open primary and ranked-choice voting is being slow-walked into something smaller and safer for the political class....
04 Dec, 2025
-
1 min read
Trump sitting in the oval office with a piece of paper with a cannabis leaf on his desk.
Is Trump About to Outflank Democrats on Cannabis? Progressives Sound the Alarm
As President Donald Trump signals renewed interest in reclassifying cannabis from a Schedule I drug to Schedule III, a policy goal long championed by liberals and libertarians, the reaction among some partisan progressive advocates is not celebration, but concern....
08 Dec, 2025
-
5 min read
Malibu, California.
From the Palisades to Simi Valley, Independent Voters Poised to Decide the Fight to Replace Jacqui Irwin
The coastline that defines California’s mythology begins here. From Malibu’s winding cliffs to the leafy streets of Brentwood and Bel Air, through Topanga Canyon and into the valleys of Calabasas, Agoura Hills, and Thousand Oaks, the 42nd Assembly District holds some of the most photographed, most coveted, and most challenged terrain in the state. ...
10 Dec, 2025
-
6 min read
Ranked choice voting
Ranked Choice for Every Voter? New Bill Would Transform Every Congressional Election by 2030
As voters brace for what is expected to be a chaotic and divisive midterm election cycle, U.S. Representatives Jamie Raskin (Md.), Don Beyer (Va.), and U.S. Senator Peter Welch (Vt.) have re-introduced legislation that would require ranked choice voting (RCV) for all congressional primaries and general elections beginning in 2030....
10 Dec, 2025
-
3 min read