Replies

This decision is pretty stupid.

While the open primary may not be fair to parties, if it were the problem that the 9th Circuit seems to think it is, WE WOULD CHANGE IT OURSELVES.

We have an initiative process. We can modify our our system.

There's been no movement in WA to change our primaries. Obviously, we haven't considered it a problem. Why the f%$# are these Federal Judges sticking their noses in our business?

Coming on the heels of the delay in the CA recall, it seems clear to me that the 9th Circuit is completely out of control.

...and I'm not just blustering....this court is out of control.

While the open primary may not be fair to parties, if it were the problem that the 9th Circuit seems to think it is, WE WOULD CHANGE IT OURSELVES. We have an initiative process. We can modify our our system.

The initiative process is great for when the legislature and courts do not do their jobs properly. However, in this case, the court did its job just fine (as far as I can tell).

To argue against the decision you need to explain to me why a non-Republican (or non-Democrat) should have the right to help decide who the Republican (or Democrat) nominee for something will be. The idea is bizarre on its face, if you even do just a tiny bit of thinking about what a "political party" is and why it exists.

There's been no movement in WA to change our primaries. Obviously, we haven't considered it a problem.

Well, then you are wrong not to consider it a problem. Open primaries are an impingement on the right to free association (among other things).

Why the f%$# are these Federal Judges sticking their noses in our business?

Because apparently your state was violating its citizens' right to free association.

Now, to be fair, I'm not sure that was the basis for the 9th's ruling. It may have been some totally wacky basis. Knowing the 9th, it wouldn't surprise me.

However, the fact remains that forcing "open primaries" on political parties is unjustifiable. Whether or not a majority of Washingtonians know it, or are mad enough about it to start an initiative process.

Coming on the heels of the delay in the CA recall, it seems clear to me that the 9th Circuit is completely out of control. ...and I'm not just blustering....this court is out of control.

That may be, but doesn't mean this decision by itself is bad. In fact, going with your "out of control" theory, maybe they made this decision to try to "cover their tracks"... they make the anti-recall decision, but then they make this one (which helps ideological conservatives against RINOs for example, as described in earlier posts), so they can claim to have done things to anger "both sides"... who knows?

Matters governing how the parties in ANY state choose their nominees are up to the STATE LEGISLATURE not the federal courts. If the parties want this changed, then they can lobby their respective state legislature members to change it. If the people want it changed, they can push for a referendum or ask the legislature to change it. The courts should not be involved at all.