DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Three Libertarian candidates running for Congress in Iowa will not be on the ballot in November, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday, a move that could benefit Republicans in two competitive districts.
The high court issued a swift and final ruling after oral arguments Tuesday, more than a week after the deadline for state officials to certify the names of nominees before ballots can be printed.
Iowans affiliated with the Republican Party filed objections to the three candidates, alleging that the Libertarian Party of Iowa had not followed state law regarding the process for nominating their candidates. A panel of three elected state officials, consisting of two Republicans and one Democrat, ruled 2-1 in favor of the challengers.
The Libertarian candidates filed a lawsuit. A Polk County judge ruled Saturday that the state appeals panel’s decision was appropriate, and the candidates immediately appealed to the state Supreme Court.
The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision on Wednesday.
Independent and third-party candidates typically have little chance of winning, but the question of how much their support could influence the outcome of the race has concerned both Democratic and Republican leaders.
“Generally speaking, the parties are concerned about minor parties taking votes away from them,” said Stephen Medvic, a professor of government at Franklin & Marshall College. “It’s a pretty simple calculation. The Libertarian is more likely to take votes away from the Republican.”
One of Iowa’s four congressional races in 2022 was decided by a razor-thin margin. Republican Zach Nunn, challenging incumbent Democrat Cindy Axne, won by less than a percentage point. There was no third-party candidate.
Nunn faces Democrat Lanon Baccam in the 3rd Congressional District, and incumbent Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks faces Democrat Christina Bohannan in the 1st District.
Conservative attorney Alan Ostergren, who represented the challengers, argued that the candidates were improperly nominated at the party convention because the delegates at the first county conventions had not yet begun their terms. Under state law, delegates begin their terms the day after they are selected at the precinct caucuses, but the Libertarian Party held its county conventions on the same day.
Secretary of State Paul Pate and Attorney General Brenna Bird, two Republicans on the state elections panel, agreed. The lone dissent on the panel came from State Auditor Rob Sand, a Democrat who accused his colleagues of political bias against the Libertarian candidates.
Before the Iowa Supreme Court, the state argued that upholding written election law protects the integrity and transparency of elections. These laws ensure that delegates have the effective authority to speak on behalf of voters and prevent conflicts that could result in more than one candidate.
Ostergren added that the laws may seem “strict” when enforced, but they provide consistency in the process of accessing the ballot box.
“If you want to be on the ballot for the general election and have every eligible Iowan who can vote show up and have you choose over other people, then you have to abide by those rules,” he said.
Lawyers for the candidates argued that the formality does not invalidate the selection of candidates – which is uncontested within the party – and justifies a breach of the organization, not the removal of the candidates from the ballot.
Ultimately, Libertarian nominees Nicholas Gluba in the 1st District, Marco Battaglia in the 3rd District and Charles Aldrich in the 4th District will not be on the general election ballots.
Battaglia said after Tuesday’s hearing that the objections were an “unfair attack” and that he had done everything he could to ensure “things were done the right way.”
“I’m going to stay until the end of the race no matter what. I plan to do that regardless of what happens today, yesterday or tomorrow,” he said, adding that he would run a write-in campaign. “That’s the alternative they’re giving me, but I’m fine with that, if that’s what they decide.”
