High Court Accepts Case Involving Independent Voters

image
Published: 09 Mar, 2020
2 min read

UPDATE: An important court case that could change the way the court views partisanship in the courtroom will be heading to the Supreme Court on March 25th. At stake is whether party affiliation, when it comes to judges, can be a criterion for the who gets elected. Read the following update following the lower court's decision originally published by Richard Winger in Ballot Access News.

On December 6, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Carney v Adams, 19-309, a Delaware case. The State Constitution says no one can be a judge on the State Supreme Court, the Superior Court, or the Court of Chancery, unless he or she is a member of a party that has registration of at least 5% of the total.

The the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit had invalidated the law.  The state had asked for rehearing before all the Judges of the Third Circuit, and the case was reheard, but again the state lost.

Almost 25% of the voters of Delaware are not registered in the two major parties.  In the entire history of registration in Delaware, no party other than the Democratic and Republican Parties has ever held 5% of the registration. 

There are both federal and state court judges who are registered independents, and even a few who are registered as members of minor parties.  Attempts will be made to have some of them file an amicus.

The U.S. Supreme Court has not issued an opinion commenting on independent and/or minor party voters since 2005.  Six members of the Court have never written anything about minor party or independent voters since they have been on the Court:  John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh.

Justices Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer have written favorably about the rights of independent and minor party voters.  Justice Clarence Thomas, who has been on the Court longer than any justice, has always voted against minor parties and independent candidates and voters, and has authored several opinions curtailing their voting rights, Clingman v Beaver, and Washington State Grange v Washington State Republican Party.  

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