Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court denied a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the Secretary of State and county board of elections to place an independent judicial candidate on the general-election ballot. The court held that the Secretary of State did not abuse his discretion in finding the candidate’s claim of disaffiliation from the Democratic Party was not made in good faith, based on evidence including her continued membership on the party central committee, the composition of her nominating committee, and support from Democratic Party members. The case addresses the good-faith requirement for independent candidates under R.C. 3501.01(I) and 3513.257, and the standard of review for mandamus in election matters (abuse of discretion, clear and convincing evidence).
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Secretary of State abused his discretion in finding that Guest's claim of disaffiliation from the Democratic Party was not made in good faith, and thus rejecting her independent candidate petition.
Holdings
- Guest has not shown by clear and convincing evidence that Husted abused his discretion; the writ of mandamus is denied.
Key quotations
“R.C. 3501.01(I) defines 'independent candidate' as 'any candidate who claims not to be affiliated with a political party, and whose name has been certified * * * through the filing of a statement of candidacy and nominating petition, as prescribed in section 3513.257 of the Revised Code.'” (¶ 10)
“To prevail on her mandamus claim, Guest must establish a clear legal right to have her name placed on the November ballot, a corresponding clear legal duty of Husted to place her name on the ballot, and the lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.” (¶ 11)
“To satisfy the first two requirements, Guest must show that Husted 'engaged in fraud, corruption, or abuse of discretion, or acted in clear disregard of applicable legal provisions.'” (¶ 12)
“After reviewing the findings upon which Husted based his decision, analyzing those findings in context and as a whole, and affording them the appropriate weight, we find that Guest has not shown by clear and convincing evidence that Husted abused his discretion by refusing to place her name on the ballot, and we deny the writ accordingly.” (¶ 29)
Factual background
Guest was appointed to the Columbiana County Democratic Party Central Committee in February 2018. On April 14, 2018, she wrote a letter to the county party chairman stating she was resigning her appointment and that her political views were independent. On May 7, 2018, she filed a nominating petition and statement of candidacy to run as an independent candidate for common pleas judge. The board of elections deadlocked on a motion to reject her petition, and the matter was referred to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State rejected the petition, finding that Guest's claim of disaffiliation from the Democratic Party was not made in good faith, based on her continued membership on the central committee, the composition of her nominating committee (four Democrats and her husband), support from Democratic Party members, and her financial contributions to Democratic candidates.
Procedural history
Guest filed a nominating petition to run as an independent candidate for judge of the Columbiana County Court of Common Pleas. The board of elections deadlocked on a motion to reject the petition and referred the matter to the Secretary of State under R.C. 3501.11(X). The Secretary of State rejected the petition, finding that Guest remained affiliated with the Democratic Party. Guest then sought a writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court of Ohio.