soapbox

 San Bagentos fas a fustion case in Michigan, involkving the Libertarian party there and a radical middle faction, Common Sense party. I could test my AI skills by knocking out an amicus in support, or maybe on neither side.

caption 

toc

interest of amicus

summary of argument 

argument

caption 

toc

interest of amicus

I was a fusion candidate in Indiana in 1996 when I was nominated by the Libertarian and Republican Parties for Center Township Advisory Board. 

In Stewart v Taylor the 7th circuit denied a preliminary injunction, citing swamp v kennedy, without resolving state constitutional claims. My theory of the case, which my lawyer failed ot understand, was to ask for a temporary injunction to preserve the status quo until Timmons was announced, in case Timmons upheld the 10th circuit. It did not. 

 A different part of that case upheld my right to campaign signs with the wording of my choice. My protected speech was "Robbin Stewart for Township Board."

I was a Libertarian Party activist from 1976 onwards. I am currently running for Marion County Clerk as the GOP candidate. I have previously run for Marion County Clerk as the Libertarian Candidate. The current leadership of the Indiana Libertarian party is unwilling to crossnominate me, mistakenly thinking it is illegal as well just being opposed. Indiana allows crossnomination, and then the nominee gets ot choose which ballot to appear on, but not both. It is a very limited form of fusion, not what is being asked for here. 

In 1994 I wrote my LLM thesis on state constitutional law as applied to Libertarian Party ballot access. So I have a bit of expertize to share. My brief is in favor of neither party, but my sympathies are with the MILP.

summary of argument 

yeah, it does. LP should win, maybe, i dunno yet. this is placeholder pending more research.

argument