Temple v Platt case argued before the SC Supreme Court
Over on the South Carolina Green Party blog, I’ve posted a round up of recent news on Eugene Platt’s case in state court concerning the party loyalty oaths.
Platt, who as served on the James Island Public Service Commission for many years, nearly won the SC House District 115 running as a Democrat in 2006. In 2008 Platt sought and was awarded the Green Party nomination for the same seat, then ran in the Democratic Primary hoping to set up a fusion campaign. Platt lost the Democratic Party primary, then was kept off the ballot as a Green when the SC State Election Commission upheld the larger party’s loyalty oath. This was despite the overall legality of fusion and the oath’s technical application to write-in and petition campaigns only.
Lawyers representing the ACLU Voting Rights Project argued the case of Temple v Platt’s case before the South Carolina Supreme Court on Wednesday, January 6. The case arises from the Democratic Party of South Carolina’s successful move to keep Eugene Platt off the November 2008 ballot by means of a loyalty oath. As Ballot Access News helpfully explains:
The Post & Courier is conducting an online poll, asking “Should a political candidate be able to register with more than one party to run for elected office?” We encourage Greens and other supporters of independent politics to visit the poll and vote ‘yes.’ The poll is here: http://www.postandcourier.com/polls/2010/jan/should-political-candidate-be-able-register-more-o/.
Posted on January 8, 2010, in Eugene Platt, Green Party, Politics, South Carolina and tagged ACLU Voting Rights Project, Charleston Green Party, Eugene Platt, fusion, George Temple, South Carolina State House Seat 115, South Carolina Supreme Court, Temple v Platt. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.