{"channel":"usconst","content":"in the 11th circuit: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202214031.pdf - Polelle v. Turner, etc.\r\n\r\nThe main claim of the case is that a \"closed primary\" unfairly violates his rights.\r\n\r\nThe court disagrees, although it is not entirely in agreement as-to how. Two of the judges reject it on the merits. The third finds the complaint to not have standing.\r\n\r\n----\r\n\r\nGeorge Washington, famously, was opposed to the concept of political parties. But that did not stop the force of political gravity from creating them.\r\n\r\nSo, of course the US Constitution is silent on the topic. State Constitutions are generally also silent. ( ChatGPT says that \"21 states\" refer to political parties, but its examples are all either negative examples (Nebraska having a legislature *without* political parties) or are trivial (Minnesota allowing elected officials to be delegates to political party conventions).) ( after repeated badgering, it pointed to Delaware having a clause that << Three of the five Justices of the Supreme Court shall be of one major political party, and two of the other major political party. >>)\r\n\r\n----\r\n\r\nThis is, on balance, probably a good thing. Laws designed to *enshrine* a system of two parties, equal in power, are generally bad. They make assumptions, they encourage complacency and decadence, and they encourage a type of insidious collusion.","created_at":"2025-03-12T02:48:10.301791","id":298,"llm_annotations":{},"parent_id":null,"processed_content":"

in the 11th circuit: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202214031.pdf - Polelle v. Turner, etc.\r

\n

The main claim of the case is that a \"closed primary\" unfairly violates his rights.\r

\n

The court disagrees, although it is not entirely in agreement as-to how. Two of the judges reject it on the merits. The third finds the complaint to not have standing.\r

George Washington, famously, was opposed to the concept of political parties. But that did not stop the force of political gravity from creating them.\r

\n

So, of course the US Constitution is silent on the topic. State Constitutions are generally also silent. \n \ud83d\udd25\n ( ChatGPT says that \"21 states\" refer to political parties, but its examples are all either negative examples (Nebraska having a legislature without political parties) or are trivial (Minnesota allowing elected officials to be delegates to political party conventions).)\n \n \ud83d\udca1\n ( after repeated badgering, it pointed to Delaware having a clause that Three of the five Justices of the Supreme Court shall be of one major political party, and two of the other major political party.)\n \r

This is, on balance, probably a good thing. Laws designed to enshrine a system of two parties, equal in power, are generally bad. They make assumptions, they encourage complacency and decadence, and they encourage a type of insidious collusion.

","quotes":[],"subject":"political parties"}