# Jurisdictional Statement — Jernigan v. Lendall

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385004_0888%3A1

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Jurisdictional Statement
- **Published:** January 1, 1977
- **Citation:** 433 U.S. 901

## Text

- Supreme Cn, Court, U $.
FILE op

76-680 * NOV +=

1976

Supreme Court Of The United States

OCTOBER TERM, 1976

No.

GeorcE O. JERNIGAN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY

AND AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE rs

STATE OF ARKANSAS ...........00ceceseeeeeees Appellant
in : ~

UE SE % 60.55 0 0 gos po cts cee sec ce obb oe Qeecs Appellee

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT

JAMES Guy TUCKER
Attorney General
State of Arkansas

Lonniz A. POWERS

° Deputy Attorney General
Justice Building
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201

[See
REQ. 76-14372 50 COPIES
—_—_—_—_— OE eeeEeEOOe___

INDEX

Page
oe on eee ccna es soutekecue 2
Ne eee ee euenaaeanee 2
QU TIONG PRREBEINIED ow... ccc ccc ccc ccc cc ccecs 2
UEP EEE MOT UNSTEEED occ cccccccccccccccvcstccece 3
STATEMENT OF THE CASE ....................0000: 5
I oe ea ee ee ce ee a ee 11
TE cee ae eel led. sie oe eels 12
Pn Tr occ eel uciueauulpeweceencewannans 13
ee ee ee ee an 16
CITATIONS

Cases:
Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 92 S. Ct. 849, 31

SS Ff Re nee nee 2
Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431, 91 S. Ct. 1970,

es ED ee a su chick donnendeatesee 7
Lendall v. Bryant, 387 F. Supp. 397 (1974) ....... 5, 7, 14
Moore v. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814, 89 S. Ct. 1493,

Se ee es OD noc eeccn edadeeeeseneesecechss 2
Salera v. Tucker, 399 F. Supp. 1258 (E.D. Pa.

1975), aff'd Mem., 424 U.S. 959, 96 S. Ct.
RR Ge a, Bk We Oe I og vcs ane ccaccccucesccccss 2
Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 94S. Ct. 1274, 39

Ff eres: ee ene 8
Miscellaneous:
Developments In The Law — Elections, 88 Harv.

2 S fF Pr err rT eer er 9

— en

IN THE

Supreme Court Of The United States

OCTOBER TERM, 1976

No.

GeorGE O. JERNIGAN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY
AND AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE

EP GE ves cccicceetsicnasenenscds Appellant
VS.
Se ES Edcei cedcdsckevks conve kesueweeuss Appellee

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT

Appellant appeals from the judgment of the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas,
entered on August 20, 1976, declaring certain statutes of
the State of Arkansas, Ark. Stat. Ann. §§3-105(c) and 3-113
(a) (Repl. 1976), unconstitutional under the United States
Constitution, and submits this Statement to show that the
Supreme Court of the United States has jurisdiction of the
appeal and that a substantial question is presented.

2
OPINION BELOW

The opinion of the District Court for the Eastern
District of Arkansas, Western Division, is not yet reported.
Copies of the Memorandum Opinion and Order appear in
the Appendix as A and B.

JURISDICTION

This action was brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $1343
and 42 U.S.C. $§1981 and 1983 challenging the constituticnal
validity of Ark. Stat. Ann. §§3-105(c) and 3-113(a) (Repl.
1976). The judgment of the District Court was entered on
August 20, 1976, and notice of appeal was filed in that
Court on September 17, 1976. The jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court to review this decision by direct appeal is
conferred by 28 U.S.C. §1253. The following decisions sus-
tain the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to review the
judgment on direct appeal in this case: Moore v. Ogilvie,
394 U.S. 814, 89 S. Ct. 1493, 23 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1969); Salera wv.
Tucker, 399 F. Supp. 1258 (E.D. Pa. 1975) aff'd mem., 424
U.S. 959, 96 S. Ct. 1451, 47 L. Ed. 2d 727 (1976); Bullock v.
Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 92 S. Ct. 849, 31 L. Ed. 2d 92 (1972).

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Did the three-judge District Court correctly decide
that Ark. Stat. Ann. $§3-105 (c) and 3-113(a) (Repl. 1976),
insofar as they require an independent candidate for public
office to file nominating petitions containing a specified
number of signatures on or before the first Tuesday in
April next preceding the general election at which the
candidate wishes to have his name appear on the ballot,
are unconstitutional as depriving the oe « reasonable
access to a place on the ballot? .

3

2. Did the appellee present to the District Court
sufficient evidence upon which it could find that the filing
deadline imposed by Arkansas law unconstitutionally
impaired the appellee’s ability to qualify as an independent
candidate?

STATUTES INVOLVED
Ark. Stat. Ann. $3-105(c) (Repl. 1976):

“(c) Any person desiring to have his name placed
upon the ballot as an independent candidate without
political party affiliation for any State, county, town-
ship or district office, in any general election in this
State shall file as an independent candidate in the
manner provided herein, no later than the date fixed
by law as the deadline for filing political practice
pledges, and party pledges, if any be required by the
rules of the party, to qualify as a candidate of a
political party in a primary election, and shall furnish
at the time he files as an independent candidate, peti-
tions signed by not less than ten percent (10%) of the
qualified electors in the county, township or district
in which such person is seeking office, but in no event
shall more than 2,000 signatures be required for a
district office, or if such person is a candidate for State
office or for United States Senator, in which a State-
wide race is required, such person shall file petitions
signed by not less than ten percent (10%) of the
qualified electors of the State, or 10,000 signatures of
qualified electors, whichever is the lesser, each of
whom shall be a registered voter, and such petitions
shall be directed to the official with whom such per-
son is required by law to file nomination certificates
to qualify as a candidate, requesting that the name of

4

such person be placed on the ballot for election to the
office mentioned in the petition. Such petitions shall
be circulated not earlier than sixty (60) calendar days
prior to the deadline for filing such petitions to qualify
as an independent candidate. In determining the num-
ber of qualified electors in any county, township,

district or in the State, the total number of votes cast |

therein for all candidates in the preceding general
election for the office of Governor shall be conclusive
of the number of qualified electors therein for the
purposes hereof. The sufficiency of any petition filed
under the provisions hereof may be challenge
[challenged] in the same manner as provided by law
for the challenging of Initiative and Referendum peti-
tions. Independent candidates for municipal office may
qualify by petition of not less than ten (10) nor more
than fifty (50) electors of the ward or city in which
the election is to be held. Except in case of a vacancy
occurring in any nomination by withdrawal, death, or
otherwise, a person who has been defeated in a party
primary shall not be permitted to file as an indepen-
dent candidate in the general election for the office for
which he was defeated in the party primary.”

Ark. Stat. Ann. §3-113(a):

“(a) Party pledges, if any, and political practice
pledges, for primary elections shall be filed, and ballot
fees shall be paid during regular established business
hours between 12 o’clock noon and on the second (2nd)
Tuesday in March and 12 o’clock noon on the first
(1st) Tuesday in April before the preferential primary
election. Party pledges, if any, and political practice
pledges shall be filed, and ballot fees for special pri-
mary elections shall be paid, on or before the deadline

established by proclamation of the Governor. The filing
period shall consist of three (3) weeks prior to the
filing deadline.”

The complete texts of Ark. Stat. Ann. §$§3-105 and
3-113 (Repl. 1976) which are found at pages 56, 57 and 58;
and 68, 69 and 70 of Volume 2, Part 1, 1976 Replacement to
Arkansas Statutes, 1947 Annotated, Official Edition, are
set forth as Appendix C hereto.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

In 1974 the appellee, Mr. Jim Lendall, filed a suit in
equity challenging the qualification requirements for
independent candidates contained in the Election Code of
the State of Arkansas. More particularly, he challenged the
provisions of section 3-105, which then required an inde-
pendent candidate to file his pledge with the Secretary of
State by the first Tuesday in April preceding the general
election in November and to accompany his pledge with
nominating petitions signed by not less than 15 percent of
the qualified electors of the district. A three-judge district
court was constituted and a per curiam opinion entered
holding section 3-105(c) (as then written) to be “uncon-
stitutional as applied to independent candidates for State,
district, county and township offices, including the
plaintiff.” Declaratory relief was granted accordingly, but

injunctive relief was denied because it was too late to be
of any benefit to the plaintiff. It was there stated: “Of
course, if the Legislature does not act, and if the Secretary
of State undertakes to enforce the statute as it is now
written, it may be necessary to enjoin him from so doing,
assuming that our decision here is a correct one.” See
Lendall v. Bryant, 387 F. Supp. 397, 403 and 404 (1974).

6

By Act No. 700 of 1975, the Arkansas Legislature
amended the provisions of section 3-105(c) by reducing
the percentage of petitioners required to “not less than ten
percent of the qualified electors in the county, township or
district in which such person is seeking office, but in no
event shall more than 2,000 signatures be required for a
district office.” In Statewide races the percentage was also
reduced to ten percent, “or 10,000 signatures of qualified
electors, whichever is the lesser.” Except for the changes
relating to the number of petitioners, section 3-105(c) was
left unchanged.

On June 15, 1976, Mr. Jim Lendall filed his complaint
in the District Court in which he challenges the filing
deadline for independent candidates which, by reference,
is fixed as “12 o’clock noon on the first Tuesday in April
before the preferential primary election.” See Section 3-113
(a). That date is also the deadline for persons seeking to
qualify as candidates of political parties in primary
elections. Plaintiff here is concentrating his attack upon
the filing deadline and is not presently attacking the new
petition requirements referred to above.

The appellant and the appellee stipulated before the
District Court that appellee is a resident and qualified
elector of the State of Arkansas residing in State Senatorial
District No. 3 in Pulaski County, Arkansas and that he

meets the eligibility requirements of Article 5, §4 of the
Arkansas Constitution for election to the Arkansas Senate.
Further, it was stipulated that subsequent to the 1976
Arkansas party primaries, the appellee announced his
intention to seek nomination as an independent candidate
for State Senate District No. 3. The appellee did not
attempt to file petitions for nomination as an independent

7

candidate but if he had done so at any time subsequent to
the time established in the statute, the appellant, George
O. Jernigan, Jr., the duly appointed. and acting Secretary
of State of the State of Arkansas, would have refused to
allow the filing of the petitions.

No hearing was held and no evidence was introduced
other than the stipulation and an affidavit of the appellant.

THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE SUBSTANTIAL

This case presents the Court with the opportunity for
and necessity of resolving an implicit conflict between its
decision in Jenness v. Fortson, 403 U.S. 431, 91 S. Ct. 1970,
29 L. Ed. 2d 554 (1971) and its recent affirmance without
opinion of the case of Salera v. Tucker, supra. Both of those
cases dealt with state statutory schemes which imposed
filing deadlines on independent candidates in advance of
the party primaries. This Court approved in Jenness an
independent candidate filing deadline of the second
Wednesday in June which was the same as the party
candidate deadline and disapproved in Salera an April
filing deadline which fell between the party candidate
deadline and the party primary.

The District Court in this case found the challenged
statute to be unconstitutional “generally for the same
reasons which were cited as the basis for the Court’s
decision in Lendall v. Bryant, [387 F. Supp. 397 (1975) ].”
The only reason articulated by the District Court in that
case for invalidating the filing deadline was the Court’s
statement that “serious independent candidacies generally
arise from substantial public dissatisfaction with party
nominees or with the positions taken by the organized
parties with respect to important issues. And that

dissatisfaction does not ordinarily manifest itself until
party nominees and party positions are known. It is simply
to much to require a would-be independent candidate to
obtain the signatures of 15% of the qualified electors of a
State or political subdivision thereof weeks in advance of
the primary elections and months ahead of the general
election. See in this connection the remarks of Mr. Justice
Brennan in his dissenting opinion in Storer v. Brown, supra,
415 U.S. at 755, 758, 94 S. Ct. 1274.” 387 F. Supp. at 402.
That statement is in direct conflict with the opinion of this
Court that “Georgia does not fix an unreasonably early
filing deadline for candidates not endorsed by established
parties.” Jenness, supra, 403 U.S. at 438. In spite of the
Jenness decision, both Salera v. Tucker, supra, and the
District Court in this case assume that independent candi-
dates have a constitutional right to wait until party
candidates are known before filing for office. If it is
constitutionally permissible for California to force prospec-
tive independent candidates to disaffiliate from any
political party 12 months prior to the party primaries,
how can it be unreasonable for Arkansas to demand that
independent candidates make their decisions less than two
months prior to the party primaries? Storer v. Brown, 415
U.S. 724, 94S. Ct. 1274, 39 L. Ed. 2d 714 (1974).

This Court should take jurisdiction of this appeal in
order to determine whether, as the District Court has
implicitly found, a filing deadline for independent candi-
dates which is the same as the filing deadline for party
candidates is per se unconstitutional or whether, as this
Court found in the Jenness case, supra, that a court may
constitutionally establish a filing deadline for independent
candidates which is the same as the filing deadline for
party candidates.

A decision on this question is especially crucial since
one of the compelling state interests urged upon the
District Court in an attempt to justify this filing deadline
was the State’s interest in preserving a viable party
system. The above-quoted passage from Lendall v. Bryant,
supra, ignores the State’s compelling interest in promoting
and strengthening the party system. The State can, by
keeping down independent candidacies which tend to
fragment political parties, promote the strengthening of
parties.

“It seems undeniable that the political stability that a
two party system fosters, by encouraging ‘a politics of
coalition and accommodation rather than. . . ideological
and charismatic fragmentation,’ is a compelling state
interest.” Developments In The Law — Elections, 88 Harv.
L. Rev. 1111, 1138 (1975) (footnote omitted).

The State’s compelling interest in protecting a viable
party system and guarding it from the inroads of ad hoc
independent candidacies may be promoted by requiring
independent candidates to file at the same time as party
candidates. By making it easier for one to become a party
candidate than an independent candidate, the State en-
courages the process of accommodation and compromise
so vital to a strong two party system.

Arkansas imposes no undue restrictions on the forma-
tion of new political parties. A new party may be formed
by filing with the Secretary of State petitions bearing the
signatures of qualified electors equal to seven percent
(7%) of the total vote cast for Governor or Presidential
electors at the last general election. Ark. Stat. Ann. §3-101
(a) (Repl. 1976). Any qualified elector may sign such
petitions. Ne restrictions are imposed because of past
affiliation with any other political party.

10

This compelling state interest requires that the filing
deadline stay at the first Tuesday in April unless the
Legislature should choose a later time for the filing of all
candidates. Such a legitimate state interest is implicitly
recognized in Jenness, supra, which approved a filing
deadline for all candidates, party as well as independent,
on the same day.

The other substantial question presented by this
appeal is whether the District Court had sufficient
evidence before it on which it could find that the filing
deadline imposed by Arkansas law unconstitutionally
impaired the appellee’s ability to qualify as an independent
candidate.

All the record in this case contains in the way of
evidence is the stipulation of the parties and the affidavit
of the appellant. There was no evidence before the District
Court that the filing deadline established by Arkansas law
had in any way adversely affected the plaintiff's ability to
qualify as an independent candidate. The District Court
can not be allowed to presume on the basis of no evidence
whatsoever, that a validly enacted statute of the Arkansas
General Assembly unconstitutionally impairs the appellee’s
ability to run for political office.

This Court has many times recognized a state’s ability
to reasonably restrict access to the ballot. There must
therefore be evidence presented to the District Court
which will show that the restrictions imposed by state law
are unreasonable before a District Court can declare them
unconstitutional. The District Court in this case did not
have such evidence before it because the appellee made
no attempt to present such evidence. See, Salera v. Tucker,
supra, 399 F. Supp. at 1266 and 1267. It denies the State of

11

Arkansas due process of law for the District Court to decide
that a State statute is unconstitutional when the District
Court has been presented with no evidence upon which it
can make such a determination.

CONCLUSION

It is submitted that the District Court erred in holding
that the filing deadline imposed by Ark. Stat. Ann. §3-105
(c) (Repl. 1976) is unconstitutional and that the Court
erred in making that determination when it did not have
sufficient evidence presented to it to enable it to reach
such a conclusion. Appellant believes that the questions
presented by this appeal are substantial and that they are
of public importance.

Respectfully submitted,

JAMES Guy TUCKER
Attorney General
State of Arkansas

LONNIE A. POWERS

Deputy Attorney General
Justice Building

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201

12
Appendix “A”

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION

Se Ds. cc adere ae kensbndeueesnas saueeedes Plaintiff
vs. No. LR-76-C-184

GeorcE O. JERNIGAN, JR.,
Individually and as Secretary
of State of the State of Arkansas .............. Defendant

ORDER

Pursuant to the Memorandum Opinion filed this day,
it is Ordered that the defendant permit the plaintiff to file
proper petitions as an independent candidate for State
Senate in District 3 if said petitions are tendered on or
before 12 o’clock noon, August 31, 1976. If petitioner’s
filings are otherwise adequate and if he complies with all
other pertinent state laws, defendant is further ordered to
permit plaintiff to qualify as an independent candidate and
have his name placed on the November 2 General Election
Ballot as such.

Dated this 20th day of August, 1976.

/s/ J. Smith Henley
United States Circuit Judge

/s/ Garnett Thomas Eisele
United States District Judge

/s/ Terry L. Shell
United States District Judge

FILED: US. District Court, Eastern District Arkansas,
August 20, 1975, W. H. McClellan, Clerk.

13
Appendix “B”

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
ee CD kc evnvenccudawdcdeecbasduewenses Plaintiff

vs. No. LR-76-C-184

GeorGE O. JERNIGAN, JR.,
Individually and as Secretary
of State of the State of Arkansas ............. Defendant

PER CURIAM:
MEMORANDUM OPINION

In 1974 the plaintiff here, Mr. Jim Lendall, filed a suit
in equity challenging the qualification requirements for
independent candidates contained in the Election Code of
the State of Arkansas. More particularly, he challenged the
provisions of section 3-105, which then required that an
independent candidate must file his pledge with the Secre-
tary of State by the first Tuesday in April preceding the
general election in November and that he accompany his
pledge with nominating petitions signed by not less than
15 percent of the qualified electors of the district. A
three-judge district court was constituted and a per
curiam opinion entered holding that section 3-105(c) (as
then written) to be “unconstitutional as applied to inde-
pendent candidates for State, district, county and township
offices, including the plaintiff.” Declaratory relief was
granted accordingly, but injunctive relief was denied be-
cause it was too late to be of any benefit to the plaintiff. It
was there stated, “Of course, if the Legislature does
nct act, and if the Secretary of State undertakes to enforce
the statute as it is now written, it may be necessary to
enjoin him from so doing, assuming that our decision here

14

is a correct one.” See Lendall v. Bryant, 387 F. Supp. 397
(1974).

By Act No. 700 of 1975, the Arkansas Legislature
amended the provisions of section 3-105(c) by reducing
the percentage of petitioners required to “not less than ten
percent of the qualified electors in the county, township or
district in which such person is seeking office, but in no
event shall more than 2,000 signatures be required for a
district office.” In statewide races the percentage was also
reduced to ten percent, “or 10,000 signatures of qualified
electors, whichever is the lesser.” Except for the changes
relating to the number of petitioners, section 3-105(c) was
left unchanged.

On June 15, 1976, Mr. Jim Lendall filed the complaint
in this action in which he challenges the filing deadline for
independent candidates which, by reference, is fixed as
“12 o’clock noon on the first Tuesday in April before the
preferential primary election.” See Section 3-113(a). That
date is also the deadline in which persons might seek to
qualify as candidates of political parties in primary
elections. Plaintiff here is concentrating his attack upon
the filing deadline and is not presently attacking the new
petition requirements referred to above.

The facts were stipulated by the parties, and briefs
were filed. Oral argument was heard this day before the
full three-judge court.

After considering the evidence, the law and the
arguments of the attorneys, the Court concludes that the
filing deadline for independent candidates for district
offices, found in section 3-113, Ark. Stats., is unconstitu-
tional, generally for the same reasons which were cited as
the basis for the Court’s decision in Lendall v. Bryant,
supra.

15

Mr. Jim Lendall has been diligent in attempting to
qualify as an independent candidate for State Senate in
District 3 and in pursuing his legal remedies in an effort to
challenge the law with respect to the filing deadline for
independent candidates for such positions. Through no
fault of his own, the Court has only been able to reach the
issues this date.

The Court is of the view, under all the circumstances,
that Mr. Lendall is entitled to injunctive relief requiring
the defendant to accept the petition filings of the plaintiff,
Mr. Lendall, which are tendered by the plaintiff on or
before 12 o’clock noon on August 31, 1976. However, our
decision in this respect should not be deemed as requiring
the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas to establish
a deadline so near the general election or, indeed, to
establish any particular deadline. It is clear that the
Legislature has certain discretion with respect to such
matters, and that that discretion should not be interfered
with so long as it is exercised within constitutionally
acceptable limits.

It is the view of the Court that the General Assembly
may wish, in the light of this Court’s and other courts’
decisions, to reexamine the filing deadlines not only for
independent candidates but perhaps also for those who
wish to be candidates of political parties. In any event, the
Court is here holding only that the presently established
filing deadline for independent candidates for district
office is unconstitutional. However, we do not wish to
indicate by our opinion that we believe the petition require-
ments enacted by the General Assembly in 1975 would
withstand a constitutional attack. See Lendall v. Bryant,
supra.

16
Appendix “C”

3-105. Method of selection of nominees. — The name
of no person shall be printed on the ballot in any general
or special election in this State as a candidate for election
to any office unless such person shall have been certified
as a nominee selected as follows:

(a) Nominees of any political party for United States
Senate, United States House of Representatives, State,
District or County office to be voted upon at a general
election shall be certified as having received a majority of
the votes cast for said office, or as an unopposed candidate,
at a primary election held by such political party in the
manner provided by law.

(b) Nominees of any political party for township or
municipal office shall be declared by certification of a

primary election as provided in subsection (a) of this
Section.

(c) Any person desiring to have his name placed
upon the ballot as an independent candidate without
political party affiliation for any State, county, township
or district office, in any general election in this State shall
file as an independent candidate in the manner provided
herein, no later than the date fixed by law as the deadline
for filing political practice pledges, and party pledges, if
any be required by the rules of the party, to qualify as a
candidate of a political party in a primary election, and
shall furnish at the time he files as an independent candi-
date, petitions signed by not less than ten percent (10%)
of the qualified electors in the county, township or district
in which such person is seeking office, but in no event shall
more than 2,000 signatures be required for a district office,

17

or if such person is a candidate for State office or for United
States Senator, in which a Statewide race is required, such
person shall file petitions signed by not less than ten percent
(10%) of the qualified electors of the State, or 10,000
signatures of qualified electors, whichever is the lesser,
each of whom shall be a registered voter, and such petitions
shall be directed to the official with whom such person is
required by law to file nomination certificates to qualify as
a candidate, requesting that the name of such person be
placed on the ballot for election to the office mentioned in
the petition. Such petitions shall be circulated not earlier
than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the deadline for
filing such petitions to qualify as an independent candidate.
In determining the number of qualified electors in any
county, township, district or in the State, the total number
of votes cast therein for all candidates in the preceding
general election for the office of Governor shall be con-
clusive of the number of qualified electors therein for the
purposes hereof. The sufficiency of any petition filed under
the provisions hereof may be challenge [challenged] in the
same manner as provided by law for the challenging
of Initiative and Referendum petitions. Independent
candidates for municipal office may qualify by petition
of not less than ten (10) nor more than fifty (50) electors
of the ward or city in which the election is to be held.
Except in case of a vacancy occurring in any nomination
by withdrawal, death, or otherwise, a person who has
been defeated in a party primary shall not be permitted to
file as an independent candidate in the general election for
the office for which he was defeated in the party primary.

(d) Nominees of a political party to fill a vacancy
in nomination, as defined herein, shall be declared by:

18

(1) Certificate of the chairman and secretary of any
convention of delegates; or

(2) By a special primary election called, held and
conducted in accordance with the rules of the party; or

(3) By petition of not less than fifty (50) nor more
than one thousand (1,000) electors from the State, or dis-
trict or county in which the vacancy in nomination exists.

(e) Nominees for election at a special election called
for the purpose of filling a vacancy in office for member
of the House of Representatives of the Congress of the
United States, for Lieutenant Governor, or as a member of
the Senate or House of Representatives of the General
Assembly shall be chosen as follows:

(1) Whenever a vacancy shall exist in either of the
aforementioned offices, the Governor shall certify in
writing to the State Committee of the respective political
parties the fact of such vacancy and shall request the
respective State Committee to make a determination and
notify him in writing within ten (10) days with respect to
whether the political party desires to hold a special primary
election to choose a nominee of such party as a candidate
for election to the office in which the vacancy exists. If
the State Committee of any political party shall notify the
Governor, within the time provided above, of their request
to hold a special primary election, it shall be mandatory
that any political party desiring to choose a nominee for
election to the office in which the vacancy exists to choose
such nominee at a special primary election. In issuing the
proclamation calling for a special election to fill the vacancy
in office, the Governor shall also specify the date on which
the special primary elections shall be held, and the date
on which a run-off primary election shall be held in the

19

event a candidate does not receive a majority vote. The
proclamation of the Governor shall also establish the dead-
line for filing as a candidate for nomination, which deadline
shall allow at least ten (10) days in which candidates may
file for nomination. The date of the special primary election
shall be at least thirty (30) days, but no more than sixty
(60) days, subsequent to the date fixed as a deadline for
qualifying as a candidate for nomination, and shall be at
least ten (10) days prior to the date fixed in the proclama-
tion for holding the special election to fill the vacancy in
office. Certificates of nomination of persons nominated at
a special primary election shall be filed, and the filing fees
therefor paid, to the appropriate official at least seven (7)
days prior to the date for holding the special election to fill
the vacancy in office.

(2) In the event nominee [nominees] of political
parties as candidates for election to fill a vacancy in office
are to be chosen by special primary election, any person
desiring to be a candidate for such office as an independent
candidate without political party affiliation, may file
nomination petitions signed by not less than fifteen percent
(15%) of the qualified electors of the district or of the
State, as the case may be, as determined by the total num-
ber of votes cast in the last preceding general election for
all candidates for the office of Governor. Such petitions
shall be filed on or before the deadline fixed in the procla-
mation of the Governor to file and qualify as a candidate
for nomination at the special primary elections to be held
by the respective political parties to choose party nominees
as candidates for election to fill the vacancy in office.

(3) If the State Committee of neither of the political
parties shall notify the Governor, within the time provided
hereinabove, of the desire to hold a special primary election

20

to choose a nominee of such political party as a candidate
for election to fill the vacancy in office, the Governor shall,
in issuing his proclamation calling for the special election,
fix a deadline for filing as a nominee for election at such
special election. In such event, nominations may be made
either upon certification of the chairman or secretary of a
convention of delegates of a political party called and held
in accordance with the rules of the party, or upon petition
of electors of the district or the state, as the case may be,
in which the vacancy exists, signed by not less than one
hundred (100) qualified electors of the district in which
a vacancy in the Senate or House of Representatives of the
General Assembly shall exist or by not less than five
hundred (500) qualified electors of the district in which
the vacancy exists with respect to a member of the House
of Representatives of the Congress of the United States,
or of the State of Arkansas with respect to the office of
Lieutenant Governor. [Acts 1969, No. 465, Art. 1, $5, p.
1195; 1971, No. 261, §3, p. 599; 1972 (Ex. Sess.), No. 42, $1,
p. 2368; 1975, No. 1700, §1, p. —.]

3-113. Schedule of dates applicable to primary
elections. — (a) Party pledges, if any, and political practice
pledges for primary elections shall be filed, and ballot fees
shali be paid during regular established business hours
between 12 o’clock noon and on the second (2nd) Tuesday
in March and 12 o’clock noon on the first (1st) Tuesday in
April before the preferential primary election. Party
pledges, if any, and political practice pledges shall be filed,
and ballot fees for special primary elections shall be paid,
on or before the deadline established by proclamation of
the Governor. The filing period shall consist of the three
(3) weeks prior to the filing deadline.

21

(b) No later than forty (40) days before the
preferential primary election the Chairman and Secretary
of State Committee of the political party shall certify to
the various county committees the names of all candidates
who have qualified with said State Committee for election
by filing the party pledge and paying the ballot fee within
the time required by law.

(c) The general primary election shall be held on the
second Tuesday in June preceding the general election.

(d) The preferential primary election shall be held
on the Tuesday two (2) weeks prior to the general primary
election.

(e) Judges and Clerks of primary elections shall be
selected by the County Committee at an open public meet-
ing held not later than thirty-five (35) days before the
preferential primary election, and notice of said meeting
shall be in the manner as provided in Section 12 [§$3-112]
of this Article.

(f) The order in which the names of the respective
candidates shall appear on the primary election ballot shall
be determined by lot at the meeting of the County Commit-
tee held for the selection of election judges and clerks at
the time provided in subsection (e) above.

(g) The County Committee shall convene, at the time
specified in the notice to the members given by the Secre-
tary of the County Committee, on the Friday following
each primary held on the preceding Tuesday for the
purpose of canvassing the returns and certifying the
election results. If no time be specified for the meeting of
the County Committee, such meeting shall be at 2:00 p.m.

22

(h) The County Convention of a political party
holding a primary election shall be held on the first Mon-
day following the date of the general primary.

(i) Immediately following the County Convention,
the newly elected County Committee shall certify to the
County Board of Election Commissioners and the County
Clerk a list of all duly nominated candidates for county,
township and municipal offices. At the same time, the
County Committee shall certify to the Secretary of the
State Committee the results of the contests for all United
States, State and District offices. Immediately after ascer-
taining the results for all United States, State and District
offices, the State Committee shall certify to the Secretary
of State a list of all duly nominated candidates for said
offices.

(j) (1.) The Secretary of State shall, at least sixty
(60) days prior to the date of the General Election, notify
by registered mail the Chairman and Secretary of the State
Committee of the respective political parties that a certifi-
cate of nomination is due for all duly nominated candidates
for United States, State and District offices in order that
the candidate’s name be placed on the ballot of the General
Election. The State Committee shall issue said certificates
of nomination to all duly nominated candidates for United
States, State and District offices, who shall file said
certificates with the Secretary of State at least forty-five
(45) days but not more than fifty-five (55) days prior to
the General Election. However, if the Chairman and
Secretary of the State Committee of the respective political
parties are not properly notified as directed by this Section,
the failure of a candidate to file a certificate of nomination

23

shall not prevent that candidate’s name from being placed
on the ballot of the General Election.

(2.) Each County Clerk shall, at least sixty (60) days
prior to the date of the General Election, notify by register-
ed mail the Chairman and Secretary of the County Com-
mittee of the respective political parties that a certified list
of all duly nominated candidates for county, township and
municipal offices is due and shall be filed with the County
Board of Election Commissioners and the County Clerk in
order that the candidates’ names be placed on the ballot for
the General Election. The County Committee shall issue
said certified list on behalf of those duly nominated candi-
dates and submit the certified list to the County Board of
Election Commissioners and the County Clerk at least
forty-five (45) days but not more than fifty-five (55) days
prior to the General Election. However, if the Chairman
and Secretary of the County Committee of the respective
political parties are not properly notified as directed by
this Section, the failure of a certified list to be filed shall
not prevent any candidate’s name from being placed on the
ballot of the General Election.

(k) The boundaries of voting precincts in primary
elections, and the voting places therein, shall be established
at least thirty (30) days preceding any primary election,
and any alternation or change therein made subsequent to
said date shall be void.

(1) Any group of voters desiring to file a petition with
the Secretary of State signed by qualified electors equal in
number to at least seven percent [7% ] of the total vote cast
for the office of Governor or nominees for Presidential
Electors, at the last preceding election, so as to establish a

24

Political Party shall file said petition at least thirty [30]
days prior to the date established for the filing of party
pledges, if any, and political practice pledges for primary
elections. Said petition shall be filed at least five [5] days
prior to any deadline established by proclamation of the
Governor for the filing of party pledges, if any, and political
practice pledges and ballot fees for special primary elec-
tions. [Acts 1969, No. 465, Art. 1, $13, p. 1195; 1971, No. 261,
$23, p. 599; 1971, No. 347, $§5-7, p. 846; 1971, No. 829,
§$1-3, p. 1475; 1972 (Ex. Sess.), No. 37, §§1, 2, p. 2358;
1975, No. 601, §§$1, 2, p. —.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385004_0888%3A1. Public record. Not legal advice.