COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The Libertarian Party of Ohio appealed
a federal judge’s order Thursday in an effort to get its gubernatorial
candidate on the May primary ballot.
Attorneys for the party also
asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati to compel
Ohio’s elections chief to ask for an exemption to avoid printing the
primary ballots, which are slated to be mailed to certain military and
overseas voters on Saturday. Some local election boards have already
printed primary ballots, while others can print them right before
mailing them.
Earl’s candidacy would have the potential to draw
votes from Republican Gov. John Kasich as the incumbent faces likely
Democratic challenger Ed FitzGerald, the Cuyahoga County executive.
Secretary
of State Jon Husted had disqualified gubernatorial contender Charlie
Earl and the Libertarian candidate for attorney general, Steven
Linnabary, after their nominating petitions were challenged on two
grounds: that signature gatherers failed to comply with Ohio laws
requiring them to be either Libertarian or political independents and
another requiring them to disclose their employer.
Husted agreed with a hearing officer who found that two Earl petitioners failed to properly disclose
their employers.
Libertarians
sought to reinstate Earl’s ballot status, arguing that Husted’s ruling
violated petition circulators’ First Amendment rights and conflicted
with previous state rulings allowing them to submit signatures without
declaring an employer.
U.S. District Court Judge Michael Watson
ruled against the request, concluding that the law challenged by the
party "places only a minimal burden on political speech and the
disclosures it requires are substantially related to Ohio’s significant
interest in deterring and detecting fraud in the candidate petition
process."
Separately, Linnabary is asking the Ohio Supreme Court force Husted to certify his candidacy and place
him on the May 6 ballot.
Attorneys
for Linnabary argue that the man who protested his petitions lacked
standing to do so.
Linnabary’s attorneys also contend the law does not
require certain petition circulators to disclose employment because they
are independent contractors.
The state’s attorneys said Thursday
that the high court should deny Linnabary’s request because, among other
arguments, his petition circulators should have disclosed their
employment, regardless of whether they are "employees" or "independent
contractors."
"This is a simple case about a candidate who did not
follow the law — a law that is plain in its meaning, that is easy to
comply with, and that serves an important purpose," attorneys for the
state wrote in their court filing.
Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights
reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.