California Democratic Party v. Jones

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

California Democratic Party v. Jones
F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2001).
Holding
The Court held that California's blanket primary violates a political party's First Amendment freedom of association.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityScalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
ConcurrenceKennedy
DissentStevens, joined by Ginsburg (part I)
Laws applied
California's prop. 198

California Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that California's blanket primary violates a political party's First Amendment freedom of association.[1]

Prior history

In California, candidates for public office could gain access to the general ballot by winning a qualified political party's primary. In 1996, voter-approved Proposition 198 changed California's partisan primary from a

California Secretary of State, alleging that the blanket primary violated their First Amendment right of association. Jones countered that a blanket primary will intensify the election and allow for better representation in elected office. Siding with Jones, District Judge David F. Levi
held that the primary's burden on the parties' associational rights was not severe and was justified by substantial state interests. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Supreme Court

California Democratic Party v. Jones presented the following question: Does California's voter-approved Proposition 198, which changes its partisan primary from a closed primary to a blanket primary, violate political parties' First Amendment right of association?

In a 7-2 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that California's blanket primary violated a political party's First Amendment right of association. "Proposition 198 forces political parties to associate with—to have their nominees, and hence their positions, determined by—those who, at best, have refused to affiliate with the party, and, at worst, have expressly affiliated with a rival," wrote Justice Antonin Scalia for the majority.[2] "A single election in which the party nominee is selected by nonparty members could be enough to destroy the party."[3] Justice Scalia went on to state for the Court that Proposition 198 takes away a party's "basic function" to choose its own leaders and is functionally "both severe and unnecessary."[4]

Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented. Stevens wrote: "This Court's willingness to invalidate the primary schemes of 3 States and cast serious constitutional doubt on the schemes of 29 others at the parties' behest is an extraordinary intrusion into the complex and changing election laws of the States."[5]

See also

References

  1. ^ California Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000).
  2. ^ Jones, 530 U.S. at 577.
  3. ^ Jones, 530 U.S. at 579.
  4. ^ Jones, 530 U.S. at 586.
  5. ^ Jones, 530 U.S. at 598 (Stevens, J., dissenting).

External links