Washington State Republican Party v. Washington State Grange

Good Law
676 F.3d 784·2012 WL 149475
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 19, 201211-35122, 11-35124, 11-35125California6,101 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fisher, J.

We address whether the State of Washington has designed its election ballots in a manner that eliminates the risk of widespread voter confusion, a question left unresolved in Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party (“Grange ”), 552 U.S. 442 , 128 S.Ct. 1184 , 170 L.Ed.2d 151 (2008). We hold that the state has done so. The ballots, and related informational materials, inform voters that, although each candidate for partisan office may specify a political party that he or she prefers, a candidate’s preference does not imply that the candidate is nominated or endorsed by the party, or that the party approves of or associates with that candidate. Given the design of the ballot, and in the absence of evidence of actual voter confusion, we hold that Washington’s top two primary system, as implemented by the state, does not violate the First Amendment associational rights of the state’s political parties, the appellants here. We also affirm the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ ballot access and trademark claims. We reverse the district court’s order granting the state’s request for reimbursement of attorney’s fees paid in accordance with a 2006…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.