SAM Party of New York v. Kosinski

• Decision Date: 22 December 2021
• Docket Number: 20-cv-323 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), 20-cv-5820 (JGK)
• Citation: 576 F.Supp.3d 151
• Parties: SAM PARTY OF NEW YORK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. KOSINSKI, et al., Defendants. Hurley, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Kosinski, et al., Defendants. Libertarian Party of New York, et al., Plaintiffs, v. New York Board of Elections, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

576 F.Supp.3d 151

SAM PARTY OF NEW YORK, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.KOSINSKI, et al., Defendants.

Hurley, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.Kosinski, et al., Defendants.

Libertarian Party of New York, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.New York Board of Elections, et al., Defendants.

20-cv-323 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), 20-cv-5820 (JGK)

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

Signed December 22, 2021

Brette Morgan Tannenbaum, Eric Alan Stone, Paul Weiss, New York, NY, Kannon K. Shanmugam, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs SAM Party of New York in 20-cv-323 (JGK), Michael J. Volpe in 20-cv-323 (JGK).

Alex Otchy, Marc Brett Schlesinger, Peter Guirguis, Kevin W. Goering, Mintz and Gold LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiffs Linda Hurley in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Rev. Rex Stewart in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Robert Jackson in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Richard Gottfried in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Ryuh-Line Niou in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Anita Thayer in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Jonathan Westin in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), The New York State Committee of the Working Families Party in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), The Executive Board of the New York State Committee of the Working Families Party in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), The Working Families Party of New York State in 20-cv-4148 (JGK).

Michael Kuzma, Buffalo, NY, for Plaintiffs Libertarian Party of New York in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), Larry Sharpe in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), Green Party of New York in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), Gloria Mattera in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), Peter LaVenia in 20-cv-5820 (JGK).

James Ostrowski, Michael Kuzma, Buffalo, NY, for Plaintiff Anthony D'Orazio in 20-cv-5820 (JGK).

Daniel Robert Lecours, Harris Beach PLLC, Albany, NY, Kelly Foss, Kyle Douglas Gooch, Harris Beach PLLC, Pittsford, NY, Thomas John Garry, Harris Beach PLLC, Uniondale, NY, Elliot Aaron Hallak, for Defendants Peter S. Kosinski in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), 20-cv-323 (JGK), Andrew J. Spano in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), 20-cv-323 (JGK), Todd D. Valentine in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), 20-cv-323 (JGK), Robert A. Brehm in 20-cv-5820 (JGK), 20-cv-323 (JGK), 20-cv-4148 (JGK), Douglas A. Kellner in 20-cv-4148 (JGK), New York State Board of Elections in 20-cv-5820 (JGK).

Daniel Robert Lecours, Harris Beach PLLC, Albany, NY, Douglas A. Kellner, Kellner Herlihy Getty & Friedman LLP, New York, NY, Kelly Foss, Kyle Douglas Gooch, Harris Beach PLLC, Pittsford, NY, Thomas John Garry, Harris Beach PLLC, Uniondale, NY, Elliot Aaron Hallak, for Defendant Douglas A. Kellner in 20-cv-323 (JGK), 20-cv-5820 (JGK).

OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge:

The plaintiffs, New York State political organizations and their supporters, brought these actions to challenge recent amendments to the New York Election Law. The challenged amendments heightened the requirements that a political organization must meet in order to be recognized as a "party" under the Election Law. Specifically, the amendments at issue: increased the overall number of votes required for a political organization to qualify as a party (the "Party Qualification Threshold"), increased the frequency with which parties must requalify to retain their party status (the "Party Qualification Method"), and increased the number of signatures required for a non-party candidate to gain access to the ballot via an independent nominating petition (the "Petition Requirement").

The plaintiffs in the SAM Party action are the SAM (Serve America Movement) Party of New York and Michael J. Volpe, the Chairman of the SAM Party of New York (together, the "SAM Party" or "SAM Party plaintiffs"). The SAM Party plaintiffs specifically challenge the amended Party Qualification Method's reliance on presidential-election returns (as opposed to only gubernatorial-election returns). The SAM Party plaintiffs argue that the amended Party Qualification Method, as applied to them, violates their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and due process rights of the SAM Party and its supporters.

The plaintiffs in the Hurley action are Linda Hurley, Rev. Rex Stewart, Robert Jackson, Richard N. Gottfried, Ryuh-Line Niou, Anita Thayer, Jonathan Westin, the New York State Committee of the Working Families Party, the Executive Board of the New York State Committee of the Working Families Party, and the Working Families Party of New York State (together, the "WFP" or "WFP plaintiffs"). The WFP plaintiffs bring freedom of association, equal protection, and due process challenges to the Party Qualification Method and the Party Qualification Threshold, facially and as applied to WFP. The WFP plaintiffs further allege that the amendments to the Election Law violate the New York State Constitution because they interfere with the right to "fusion voting."¹

The plaintiffs in the Libertarian Party action are the Libertarian Party of New York ("LPNY"), the Green Party of New York ("GPNY"), and individual members of both parties (together, the "LPNY plaintiffs"). The LPNY plaintiffs bring First and Fourteenth Amendment challenges to the Party Qualification Method, the Party Qualification Threshold, and the Petition Requirement. The LPNY plaintiffs allege that the amendments are unconstitutional on their face and as applied to the LPNY plaintiffs. The LPNY plaintiffs also allege that the amendments to the New York Election Law violate Article VII, Section 6 of the New York State Constitution because the amendments became law as provisions of a budget bill.

All the plaintiffs brought suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the New York State Board of Elections (the "Board"), as well as the Board's chairs, commissioners, and executive directors in their official capacities.

The defendants now move for summary judgment in each of the three referenced actions. For the reasons explained below, the defendants’ motion is granted .

I.

Although the cases are now in a different procedural posture, the questions at issue in this motion are similar to those that were posed by the plaintiffs’ previous preliminary injunction motions. In those motions, the plaintiffs sought to enjoin the application of the same amendments to the New York Election Law that are at issue here. In addition, the LPNY plaintiffs sought an injunction requiring the Board to reinstate the Libertarian and Green Parties as recognized parties for the 2022 gubernatorial election. The Court denied the preliminary injunction motions by the SAM Party plaintiffs and the WFP plaintiffs in an Opinion and Order dated September 1, 2020. See SAM Party v. Kosinski, 483 F. Supp. 3d 245 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (" SAM Party I"). The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment on February 10, 2021, concluding that the SAM Party plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims. See SAM Party of N.Y. v. Kosinski, 987 F.3d 267 (2d Cir. 2021) (" SAM Party II"). This Court denied the LPNY plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion in an Opinion and Order dated May 13, 2021. See Libertarian Party of N.Y. v. N.Y. Bd. of Elections, No. 20-cv-5820, 539 F.Supp.3d 310 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2021). An appeal of that decision is pending. See LPNY Docket No. 81.

In SAM Party I, the Court concluded that the SAM and WFP plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their First and Fourteenth Amendment claims under the two-step Anderson - Burdick framework.² At the first step, the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the amendments to the Election Law caused them severe burdens. See SAM Party I, 483 F. Supp. 3d at 261. At the second step, the Court found that the interests offered by New York in support of the amendments were valid and sufficiently important to justify any burdens that the amendments imposed on the plaintiffs. See id. In SAM Party II, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reached the same conclusions with respect to the SAM Party plaintiffs’ claims. See 987 F.3d at 276, 278.³ In Libertarian Party of N.Y., this Court reached the same conclusions with respect to the LPNY plaintiffs’ claims, exploring in more detail the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Petition Requirement. See 539 F.Supp.3d at 322–27, 329–30.

II.

The factual background to these cases remains substantially unchanged from the background at the preliminary injunction stage. While the pertinent facts are set out again here, a more comprehensive discussion of the parties’ backgrounds and the history of the New York Election Law can be found in this Court's preliminary injunction opinions. See id. at 314–20 ; SAM Party I, 483 F. Supp. 3d at 250–54.

Under the New York Election Law, a political organization that supports candidates for public office can be designated either as a "party" or an "independent body." N.Y. Elec. Law § 1-104(3), (12). Because party status carries important privileges,⁴ a political organization that supports candidates for public office would generally prefer to be a party rather than an independent body. The amendments to the Election Law at issue, which were enacted in Sections 9 and 10 of Part ZZZ of the 2020-2021 Fiscal Year New York State Budget Bill, make it more difficult for political organizations to obtain and retain party status.

For 85 years, New York conferred party status on any political organization whose candidate in the prior gubernatorial election received at least 50,000 votes. Mulroy Decl., SAM Party Docket No. 84, Ex. 24 ¶ 12. This meant that political organizations had to qualify or requalify as parties every four years. The challenged amendments to the Election Law changed the frequency of party qualification and the number of votes needed to qualify. In order for a political organization to gain or retain party status under the amended law, its chosen candidate must receive the greater of 130,000 votes or 2% of votes cast in the previous presidential or gubernatorial election, whichever is more recent. N.Y. Elec. Law § 1-104(3). Thus, political organizations must now quality...