Democratic-Republican Organiz. v. Kimberly Guadagno

Third Circuit

Democratic-Republican Organiz. v. Kimberly Guadagno

700 F.3d 130, 2012 WL 5383575, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22707

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedNovember 5, 2012

Docket12-3977

StatusUnpublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 700 F.3d 130 (Democratic-Republican Organiz. v. Kimberly Guadagno) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Democratic-Republican Organiz. v. Kimberly Guadagno, 700 F.3d 130, 2012 WL 5383575, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22707 (3d Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT ORDER

JULIO M. FUENTES, Circuit Judge.

Having considered the record on appeal and the decision of the District Court, we affirm substantially for the reasons set forth by the District Court in its thorough and well-reasoned opinion.

We pause to note that the District Court correctly applied the balancing test set forth by the Supreme Court in Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 789, 103 S.Ct. 1564, 75 L.Ed.2d 547 (1983). The District Court concluded that Plaintiffs failed to provide any support or evidence that the ballot placement provisions for political party candidates burdened their independent candidacies. Furthermore, the District Court recognized that New Jersey’s interest in maintaining a manageable ballot sufficiently justified its statutory scheme. Additionally, it concluded that Plaintiffs failed to establish that prohibiting them from referencing the names of New Jersey’s political parties in their ballot slogan impermissibly burdened their First Amendment rights, and that the State’s interest of avoiding voter confusion justified the ballot slogan limitation. We find no error in this analysis. Appellants’ request for final declaratory and permanent injunctive relief is dismissed as moot.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED by the Court that the judgment of the District Court, entered October 10, 2012, is hereby affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT ORDER

JULIO M. FUENTES, Circuit Judge.

Having considered the record on appeal and the decision of the District Court, we affirm substantially for the reasons set forth by the District Court in its thorough and well-reasoned opinion.

We pause to note that the District Court correctly applied the balancing test set forth by the Supreme Court in Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780, 789, 103 S.Ct. 1564, 75 L.Ed.2d 547 (1983). The District Court concluded that Plaintiffs failed to provide any support or evidence that the ballot placement provisions for political party candidates burdened their independent candidacies. Furthermore, the District Court recognized that New Jersey’s interest in maintaining a manageable ballot sufficiently justified its statutory scheme. Additionally, it concluded that Plaintiffs failed to establish that prohibiting them from referencing the names of New Jersey’s political parties in their ballot slogan impermissibly burdened their First Amendment rights, and that the State’s interest of avoiding voter confusion justified the ballot slogan limitation. We find no error in this analysis. Appellants’ request for final declaratory and permanent injunctive relief is dismissed as moot.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED by the Court that the judgment of the District Court, entered October 10, 2012, is hereby affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 F.3d 130, 2012 WL 5383575, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/democratic-republican-organiz-v-kimberly-guadagno-ca3-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack