Presidential Debate Commission Under Fire – Again

image
Published: 17 Mar, 2017
2 min read

It has been a rough year so far for the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The group, which organizes the fall presidential debates and determines who will appear on the debate stage, may finally be forced to change its ways.

In February, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. ruled against the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the government body tasked with regulating groups like the CPD, in Level the Playing Field, et al v. FEC. Chutkan reasoned that the rules governing participation in the presidential debates were decided unfairly and arbitrarily.

The current debate rules require candidates to reach 15% in 5 national polls picked by the CPD in order to appear on the presidential debate stage. Candidates also must be on the ballot in enough states to have a mathematical chance at winning an electoral majority.

The FEC said it will not appeal the ruling. It will still have to comply with Chutkan’s court order by April 3 to provide new decisions on the administrative complaints against the CPD it previously dismissed.

And if the CPD was getting ready to slink back into the shadows, it is not going to be that easy. The U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, has decided it will hear Gary Johnson, et al v Commission on Presidential Debates on Friday, April 21.

The case was originally filed back in 2015 by Gov. Gary Johnson, Dr. Jill Stein, the Libertarian and Green Parties, and several affiliated organizations. The plaintiffs sued the CPD, arguing that it violated federal antitrust laws by essentially ensuring that the major parties have a monopoly over presidential elections.

The case was dismissed by federal court Judge Rosemary Collyer in August 2016. The judge ruled that there was little merit to the claim that the CPD is violating antitrust laws and there was no evidence the commission intentionally shuts out minor party presidential candidates.

One of the biggest issues facing this lawsuit is that unlike the FEC, the CPD is a private institution, which allowed Judge Collyer to reason that the CPD had every right to determine its own rules.

Now, however, Johnson and Stein have another shot at making their case. Will they have better luck this time around? Stay tuned. We’ll keep you updated on the appeals process.

IVP Donate

Image Source: Wikimedia Commons

You Might Also Like

Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
The latest Independent Voter Podcast episode takes listeners through the messy intersections of politics, reform, and public perception. Chad and Cara open with the irony of partisan outrage over trivial issues like a White House ballroom while overlooking the deeper dysfunctions in our democracy. From California to Maine, they unpack how the very words on a ballot can tilt entire elections and how both major parties manipulate language and process to maintain power....
30 Oct, 2025
-
1 min read
California Prop 50 gets an F
Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an 'F'
The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation....
30 Oct, 2025
-
3 min read
bucking party on gerrymandering
5 Politicians Bucking Their Party on Gerrymandering
Across the country, both parties are weighing whether to redraw congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Texas, California, Missouri, North Carolina, Utah, Indiana, Colorado, Illinois, and Virginia are all in various stages of the action. Here are five politicians who have declined to support redistricting efforts promoted by their own parties....
31 Oct, 2025
-
4 min read