Henry v. Ysursa, 148 Idaho 913

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to prevent the Secretary of State from placing Rex Rammell on the 2008 general-election ballot as an independent candidate for United States Senate. The court held that Idaho Code § 34-708 required the Secretary of State to place Rammell’s name on the ballot because he had timely filed the required declaration and county clerks had certified at least 1,000 qualified-elector signatures. The court further held that the Secretary lacked statutory authority to independently review the truthfulness of the candidate’s party-affiliation declaration or correct county-clerk certifications.

Holdings

1. When an independent statewide candidate timely files the required declaration and submits petitions certified by county clerks as containing at least 1,000 signatures of qualified electors, Idaho Code section 34-708 requires the Secretary of State to place the candidate's name on the general-election ballot.
2. A writ of prohibition does not issue where the challenged official is acting within the power conferred by law; the court will not use prohibition to require the Secretary of State to disregard county-clerk certifications or independently determine the truthfulness of a candidate's declaration when the statutes do not confer that authority.
3. Prohibition is an extraordinary remedy available only when the respondent is proceeding without or in excess of jurisdiction and there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law; it is not available to challenge conduct that is within the respondent's statutory authority.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Secretary of State would exceed his statutory authority by placing Rammell's name on the 2008 general-election ballot after receiving a declaration of independent candidacy and county-clerk certifications of at least 1,000 qualified-elector signatures.
2. Whether the Secretary of State possesses implied or inherent authority to determine the truthfulness of an independent candidate's declaration of no party affiliation or to reexamine county-clerk certifications of qualified-elector signatures.
3. Whether a writ of prohibition is the proper remedy for petitioners' challenges to the candidate's qualifications and the county clerks' signature certifications.

Disposition

writ_denied