New Mexico Forward Party asks US Supreme Court to intervene in ballot access lawsuit

New Mexico’s nascent minor political party is asking the nation’s highest court to put its two statewide candidates on the Nov. 3 general election ballot.

New Mexico Forward Party Chair Bob Perls, a former state lawmaker, is seeking to run for the U.S. Senate against incumbent Democrat Ben Ray Luján and Michael Vigil is seeking to run against incumbent New Mexico State Auditor Joseph Maestas.

While the state Forward Party successfully fielded candidates for several local races, neither Perls nor Vigil acquired the more than 14,000 signatures needed for minor party candidates to make the ballot. They subsequently sued New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver in U.S. District Court, alleging that she was enforcing discriminatory ballot laws that require them to gather far more than the roughly 2,500 and 2,350 signatures that Democratic and Republican candidates need, respectively.

U.S. District Court Judge Margaret Strickland denied their motion to place them on the ballot, but did not immediately rule on their broader case. Perls’ attorneys appealed her decision to the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed a brief in support of the party’s appeal last week, writing that political candidates of all parties “should compete on a level playing field in New Mexico’s elections. Today, they do not.”

However, the appellate court upheld Strickland’s ruling in a Tuesday filing.

Perls’ attorneys subsequently asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

In the filing addressed to Justice Neil Gorsuch, Forward Party officials argue that New Mexico has the most stringent requirements for minor party candidates in the country. Both Perls and Vigil gathered more signatures than major party candidates are required to, they wrote, alleging that the current requirements deprive their constitutional rights.

“We are asking the court to address rules that, in our view, place an extraordinary burden on a newly qualified party and its statewide candidates, leaving voters without real options on their ballots,” Perls said in a statement.

State Forward Party attorneys asked the Supreme Court to issue a decision no later than Friday, so state election officials can print ballots bearing its candidates’ names in time for early voting to begin in early October.