Greetings!

 

I suggested the other day that Maryland's new election law, SB 129, was a possible example of bad legislative intent because it ended fusion to attack the candidacy of a particular fusion candidate.  Senate candidate Kevin Zeese, seeking a three-way nomination from the Libertarians, Greens, and Populists, still feels it was aimed at him and says it should have been called the "Stop Kevin Zeese Act"

 

However, another motive may have been at work with better intentions.  The primary thrust of the law is to correct unconstitutional requirements for nomination petitions knocked down in Green Party v. Baord of Elections, 377Md. 173 (2003).  The measure was passed as an "emergency" and rushed through the legislature before the petition deadlines.  In its haste to correct one bad law the legislature may have unknowingly created a conflict of law.  As it stands now, Section 5-203(a) of the Election Code exempts President, Vice President, and "federal candidates by petition" from the state fusion ban.  The newly passed Sction 5-703.1 arguably applies the fusion ban on "any candidate", hence the conflict of law.

 

Maryland's "emergency" election law may give Loyola's new law journal on statutory interpretation a good workout.

 

Michael Richardson