<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Liberty Papers &#187; Ballot Access</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelibertypapers.org/categories/elections/election-law/ballot-access/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org</link>
	<description>Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:14:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Nader Scores Big Court Victory for Third Party Candidates</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/03/11/nader-scores-big-court-victory-for-third-party-candidates/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/03/11/nader-scores-big-court-victory-for-third-party-candidates/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Littau</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ballot Access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equal Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Independents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Individual Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Petitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategies For Advancing Liberty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Bill Of Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theory and Ideas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=4476</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s not often that I sing the praises of unsafe-at-any-speed Ralph Nader, but his recent legal victory is worthy of such praises. 
“LOS ANGELES, March 9 /PRNewswire/ &#8212; In a significant move for open-election laws, the U.S. Supreme Court today rejected an attempt to overturn a federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals&#8217; decision that the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s not often that I sing the praises of unsafe-at-any-speed Ralph Nader, but his recent legal victory is worthy of such praises. </p>
<blockquote><p>“<a href="http://sev.prnewswire.com/legal/20090310/MN8118709032009-1.html">LOS ANGELES, March 9 /PRNewswire/</a> &#8212; In a significant move for open-election laws, the U.S. Supreme Court today rejected an attempt to overturn a federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals&#8217; decision that the state of Arizona could not require independent presidential candidates to register earlier than candidates affiliated with major political parties.</p>
<p>Arizona&#8217;s petition for <em>certiorari</em> to the Supreme Court had been closely watched after 13 other states supported Arizona&#8217;s bid to have the High Court hear the case. The federal civil rights case, originally filed in Arizona federal district court, stems from Nader&#8217;s 2004 presidency bid.</p>
<p>Ralph Nader had challenged the deadline, contending it violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and political association. Lead Attorney Robert Barnes of the Bernhoft Law Firm represented Nader before the Ninth Circuit, which overturned the district court and unanimously declared the Arizona law unconstitutional. Nader&#8217;s Bernhoft Law legal team successfully argued that requiring independent candidates to register by June was unfair when the two major political parties did not hold their conventions until the fall.</p></blockquote>
<p>Perhaps as just as important was the other aspect of Nader’s challenge was the lower court striking down the provision in Arizona law which required petition circulators to be registered to vote within the state. <a href="http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/01/23/the-oklahoma-3-set-free-paul-jacob-responds/">Paul Jacob</a> and others can now circulate petitions to any state government without fear of being put in jail. What a concept! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/03/11/nader-scores-big-court-victory-for-third-party-candidates/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
