Ha ha...
See the way the dems usually operate (use a judge to break the law):
New Jersey Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Dems Replacing ‘Torch’ on Ballot
TRENTON, N.J. – The New Jersey state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the Democratic Party can replace Sen. Robert Torricelli’s name on the November ballot with former Sen. Frank Lautenberg.
The ruling gives hope to Democrats scrambling to retain their one-seat majority in the U.S. Senate through the Nov. 5 election — but Republicans vowed to appeal the decision to federal court.
The 7-0 decision cited previous rulings that said election law should be broadly interpreted to “allow parties to put their candidates on the ballot, and most importantly, to allow the voters a choice.”
The fight over which Democrat will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot erupted Monday after Torricelli dropped his faltering re-election campaign amid lingering questions about his ethics. He was admonished over the summer by a Senate committee for allegedly taking lavish campaign gifts from a contributor to his 1996 campaign.
Late Tuesday, Democrats settled on the 78-year-old Lautenberg as their substitute candidate.
Republicans say it is too close to Election Day to replace Torricelli and that Democrats shouldn’t be allowed to dump a candidate who was trailing in the polls. The GOP also said state law bars replacement candidates less than 51 days before an election; Torricelli withdrew 36 days before Election Day.
I posted my #5 before reading your reply. You nailed it.
The Torrecelli/Lautenburg analogy is a false one, IMO. In that case, the Dems wanted to get a loser off the ballot and replace him with a corpse who had name recognition. The argument hinged on the voters right to a choice on the Democrat line of the ballot.
In this case, the Dems want to remove the name of their radioactive candidate and have no intention of replacing him as required by Kansas law should a withdrawal be allowed. They don’t want the voters to have a choice on the Democrat line, hoping that they will vote for the phony Independent, Orman.
What happens if the Democrats refuse to name a candidate, or stalls? Ballots need to be printed so that absentee ballots can be mailed to the military overseas. The Kansas Secretary of State is responsible for ensuring that that occurs. Don’t the Democrats of Kansas who selected Taylor in their primary have a right to vote for him in the General Election? What is the judge going to say about that?
The particular language in the statute has never been challenged in court. I cannot imagine a scenario where the court could make a timely ruling that will inevitably be appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court. The Secretary of State had to rule as he did yesterday, according to law. Now he has to act according to law and print the ballots with Taylor’s name on them.
One more point, Kansas is not New Jersey.