Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Alaska's new elections system challenged in state court

Alaska
Zihao Chen/Getty Images

The sweeping overhaul of Alaska elections that won narrow approval last month is already being challenged in court.

A lawsuit filed in state court Tuesday by members of three political parties argues the new system must be stopped before it violates Alaskans' right to free political association, free speech, petition, due process and other rights guaranteed by the U.S. and state constitutions.

If the suit fails, starting in 2022 the traditional partisan primaries will be eliminated in favor of single contests open to all candidates for governor, state executive offices, the Legislature and Congress. The top four finishers, regardless of party, will advance to a general election reliant on ranked-choice voting.


Alaska Independence Party Chairman Robert Bird, Libertarian Scott Kohlhass and Republican attorney Kenneth Jacobus sued a day after the state certified that the ballot measure prevailed by just 3,800 out of 344,000 votes cast, a margin of 1 percentage point.

The plaintiffs argue this new election system will prevent voters from participating in their political party's process for selecting candidates to represent them and the party in a manner consistent with the party's rules.

"All political parties may select their candidates in accord with the rules of each party. This right to do so is a right guaranteed to each party and its members by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, applicable to the defendants through the Fourteenth Amendment and the Constitution of the State of Alaska. This right of all political parties and their members has been confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States," the lawsuit argues.

In addition, the suit maintains, electoral history in the state suggests that only Democrats and Republicans will advance to the November ballot, "leaving no room for members of other parties."

Defendants include the state Division of Elections and election officials. The Alaska Department of Law "will review the pleadings and respond in a timely manner," spokesperson Maria Bahr said.

In addition to making Alaska the only state other than Maine using ranked elections for almost all contests, the ballot measure also imposes new campaign finance disclosure requirements for legislative and local races.


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less