Iowa Supreme Court to rule on Libertarian ballot access by end of Wednesday

The Iowa Supreme Court plans to issue a decision by 11:59 p.m. Wednesday on whether three Iowa Libertarian congressional candidates will appear on the state’s 2024 general election ballots.

Justices said they plan to comply with a request from the Iowa Secretary of State’s office for an expedited decision on whether to take the candidates off the ballot for the Nov. 5 election. They heard oral arguments Tuesday from attorneys representing the Libertarian candidates as well as the State Objections Panel and voters challenging their candidacies.

The panel voted 2-1 on Aug. 28 to take Libertarians Nicholas Gluba in 1st Congressional District, Marco Battaglia in the 3rd District and Charles Aldrich in the 4th District off the ballot. The Republican members of the panel said their candidacies were invalid because the Libertarian Party of Iowa did not hold its county conventions in accordance with Iowa state law.

The state Libertarian Party held its county caucuses the same day as precinct caucuses on Jan. 15, despite Iowa Code stating that convention delegates elected at the caucuses do not officially take the position until the following day.

The Secretary of State’s office is seeking a quick turnaround from the courts in order to certify ballots for the upcoming Nov. 5 election. The ballots were supposed to be certified Sept. 3, but Polk County District Court Michael Huppert granted a temporary injunction on finalizing the ballots so the Libertarians’ challenge to the panel ruling could go through judicial process. Ballots are required to be certified and ready for overseas and military voters by Sept. 21, according to the Secretary of State’s office.

Huppert upheld the panel’s decision to remove the candidates from the ballot on Saturday, saying the voters who filed objections had the right to challenge Libertarian candidates’ certificates of nomination based on issues with the party’s nominating process, and that the panel’s decision does not amount to state interference into political party procedures.

Attorneys representing the candidates have argued that while the Libertarian Party of Iowa did make mistakes in its convention process, the nominations were still “substantially compliant” with state law. Jennifer DeKock, the lawyer representing Battaglia, argued before the Iowa Supreme Court Tuesday that some county conventions were held just over three hours before midnight, marking the next day when the meetings would have been valid.

“Does the failure to wait 181 minutes after caucus to begin convention justify kicking Libertarian candidates off the ballot, and violating Iowa voters’ constitutional rights to political opportunity?” DeKock asked.

Lawyers with the candidates also said the Libertarian Party of Iowa should have been given time to remedy the party’s procedural mistakes instead of having candidates removed from the ballot.

But Republican attorney Alan Ostergren told state justices that voters’ right to support the candidate of their choosing — including the Libertarian candidates taken off the ballot — were not impacted by the panel’s decision, as voters could still support the candidates as write-in candidates. If the state Supreme Court affirms the decision to keep the candidates off the ballot, all three Libertarians running in congressional races plan to continue their campaigns.

While Chief Justice Susan Christensen described the situation as a “ticky tack” violation, Ostergren argued for enforcing “strict,” rather than “substantial” compliance with Iowa laws for getting onto the ballot. He said one of the burdens that comes with major party status is ensuring that party processes are being conducted correctly according to Iowa laws.

He also argued there would be “no logical stopping place” for what would count as “substantial” compliance with the law in a situation like the Libertarian caucus and convention process, meaning that state parties could conduct their nominating processes outside of what was intended as legal by the state Legislature, he said.

“When the rule gets applied, it seems harsh,” Ostergren said. “I get that. … But these rules — and why strict compliance is necessary — is they’re like an insurance policy for the elections process. They’re (in place) so elections officials, when they have to make decisions on a quick timetable, know that there’s regularity in the process.”

Battaglia said he hopes the court will restore him and the other Libertarian candidates to the ballot, but he plans to stay in the race regardless of “if they use lawfare to take me off the ballot.” He also said he personally worked to ensure his campaign was working in compliance with Iowa law, but that he understood there were mistakes were made in the 2024 nominating process by the party.

“When you transition (from) a non-party organization to a major party, there’s a lot of things that you have to pay attention to, and unfortunately, this is one of them that we missed by a few minutes,” Battaglia told reporters.