Democrats Remove Third-Party Candidate from Pennsylvania Ballot Amid West’s Bid

In Pennsylvania, legal challenges have effectively kept the Party for Socialism and Liberation off the state’s presidential ballot, at least temporarily. Meanwhile, independent candidate Cornel West is fighting to secure a spot on the ballot with the help of a lawyer closely associated with Republican politics.

The court cases reflect the intense legal maneuvers involving third-party candidates as they attempt to make their way onto Pennsylvania’s ballot. Democratic officials have also mounted a challenge against independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s filing in the state.

This week, a judge from the Commonwealth Court sided with two Democratic Party-aligned cases, declaring that the Party for Socialism and Liberation submitted flawed paperwork. Consequently, the party’s candidate, Claudia De la Cruz, has been ordered off the ballot for the upcoming November 5 election.

The judge, Bonnie Brigance Leadbetter, highlighted that seven of the party’s 19 designated presidential electors were registered Democrats. This, she noted, violated a law aimed at preventing political disaffiliation, especially since six of these individuals participated in the Democratic primary held on April 23.

“They literally voted in the Democratic primary and then turned around to try to be electors for a third-party candidate,” pointed out Adam Bonin, an attorney aligned with the Democratic Party. “You can’t do that.”

As of now, the Party for Socialism and Liberation has not disclosed whether it intends to appeal the ruling.

In a contrasting development, a lawyer with significant ties to the Republican Party, Matt Haverstick, has taken a stand in court to challenge the state’s rejection of West’s application. Haverstick asserted, “I see no good reason for Mr. West to be kept off the ballot or Pennsylvanians otherwise prevented from voting for him.” However, he did not reveal who employed him for this legal push or their motivations.

The Secretary of State’s office, led by Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro, is contesting the legal challenge. They argue that West’s campaign failed to submit the necessary affidavits from 14 of the 19 presidential electors before the August 1 deadline. Notably, there is a wider campaign by conservative activists and Republican operatives to bolster West’s candidacy nationwide.

The upcoming November 5 election is projected to be a close contest, featuring Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. With 19 electoral votes at stake, Pennsylvania holds significant importance, being tied with Illinois for the fifth-most electoral votes and arguably the most influential among battleground states.

Both major political parties view third-party candidates as a potential threat, fearing they could divert crucial support away from their respective nominees. This concern is particularly high in Pennsylvania, a state that saw narrow margins in the previous elections, including tens of thousands of votes separating the candidates in both 2016 and 2020.

On another note, both the Green Party’s Jill Stein and the Libertarian Party’s Chase Oliver have successfully submitted their petitions to be included on Pennsylvania’s presidential ballot without facing challenges.

The challengers regarding Kennedy’s candidacy are still pending, and the Republicans are also contesting the Constitution Party’s candidate. Previously, they succeeded in their challenge against a candidate from the American Solidarity Party.

In addressing the issue concerning De la Cruz, Judge Leadbetter cited Pennsylvania law, which prohibits minor-party candidates from being registered with a major political party within 30 days following the primary election.

Leadbetter, who was elected as a Republican, found that seven out of the party’s electors were indeed registered as Democrats prior to and after the April primary. De la Cruz’s attorneys contended that the party should be allowed to replace the electors or accept a reduced number of electoral votes from Pennsylvania.

However, Leadbetter clarified that state law does not permit substitutions after the deadline in such cases, and the U.S. Constitution mandates specific proportional representation among states in the Electoral College. Thus, issuing fewer electoral votes would disrupt that crucial balance.

Source: AP