See Jones v. Dunlap.
“Ranked-choice voting” allows voters to rank three or more candidates in order of preference, rather than choosing just one. If no candidate gets 50% of the vote in the first round of voting, then the lowest-ranked candidates are eliminated, and the votes are counted again. For voters who listed the lowest-ranked candidates as their top choices, their second choices become their first choices in the recount. Supporters of ranked-choice voting say that it ensures that the candidate with the broadest support is elected.
In recent years, Maine implemented ranked-choice voting for elections for president, the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate, and this year it plans to become the first state to use ranked-choice voting in a presidential election. Republicans in Maine wanted to put a referendum on the 2020 ballot to end ranked-choice voting. To do that, they needed to gather signatures totaling at least 10% of the number of votes cast for governor in the last election. But Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap rejected their petition, finding that they fell short of the roughly 63,000 signatures required.
A state trial court disagreed with Dunlap and ruled that the referendum qualified for the ballot. It concluded that the secretary of state could not require the people who circulated the petition to be registered to vote in the place where they were living at the time. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, the state’s highest court, reversed the lower court’s ruling on Sept. 22. It concluded that the Republicans had not shown that such a requirement violates the First Amendment.
The Republicans went to the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 2, asking the justices to block the state from using ranked-choice voting while its appeal is litigated. Justice Stephen Breyer denied the plea on Oct. 6 without comment. That ruling means that the state can go forward with ranked-choice voting and the referendum will not be on the ballot in 2020. Although Maine has only four electoral votes, the presidential election was a tight one in 2016, and if ranked-choice voting had been in effect, it might well have changed the outcome in the state: Hillary Clinton carried the popular vote with 47.83% of ballots cast, Donald Trump was second with 44.87% of the vote, and Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson won 5.09% of the vote. This year, the Senate race between Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican, and Sara Gideon, her Democratic challenger, is expected to be a key one in the battle for control of the U.S. Senate.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders|
|August 24, 2020||Order by Maine Superior Court reinstating ballot measure for a "people's veto" of ranked-choice voting proposal|
|August 31, 2020||Motion for stay of superior court ruling filed by The Committee for Ranked-Choice voting, et al., in Maine Supreme Court|
|September 22, 2020||Decision issued by Maine Supreme Court suspending "people's veto" measure and reinstating ranked-choice voting|
|September 23, 2020||Motion to stay ruling pending relief from U.S. Supreme Court filed by David Jones, et al., in Maine Supreme Court|
|October 2, 2020||Application for stay filed at U.S. Supreme Court by David Jones, et al.|
|October 6, 2020||Application for stay denied by Justice Breyer|
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).
Incidentally, Gorsuch had been scheduled to give a speech at the University of Wyoming today, but his visit was canceled due to COVID.
Nothing from Kagan or Gorsuch though 😢 https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1438530948207874050