Faye Coffield v. Karen C. Handel , 599 F.3d 1276 ( 2010 )

[PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MAR 19, 2010
No. 09-13277 JOHN LEY
________________________ CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 08-02755-CV-RLV-1
FAYE COFFIELD,
JASON CROWDER,
BEATRICE WILLIAMS,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
KAREN C. HANDEL,
in her official capacity as Georgia
Secretary of State and Chairperson of
the Georgia State Election Board,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(March 19, 2010)
Before EDMONDSON and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and BARBOUR,* District
Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant-Plaintiff Coffield sought access to the 2008 general election ballot
as an independent candidate to represent Georgia’s Fourth Congressional District
in the United States House of Representatives. She was not on the ballot. Briefly
stated, she was unable to collect a sufficient number of signatures to satisfy
Georgia’s requirement that an independent candidate submit a nomination petition
signed by at least 5% of the total number of registered voters eligible to vote in the
last election for the position the candidate seeks. G A. C ODE A NN. § 21-2-170. This
appeal presents one issue: whether the district court erred when it dismissed
Coffield’s constitutional challenge for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
We conclude it did not.
Coffield claims that Georgia’s 5% rule is too burdensome; she alleges no
independent candidate for the House of Representations in Georgia has met the
requirement since 1964 and that no minor party candidate has ever met it. But she
does not allege how many candidates have tried. According to the Complaint,
Coffield’s own petitioning effort resulted in about 2000 signatures, less than 1% of
*
Honorable William Henry Barbour, Jr., United States District Judge for the Southern
District of Mississippi, sitting by designation.
2
the eligible pool and about 13,000 signatures short of what the rule required.
Our Court and the Supreme Court have upheld Georgia’s 5% rule before.
See Jenness v. Fortson, 91 S. Ct. 1970, 1974-76 (1971) (stressing lack of
restrictions on write-in candidates and on the obtaining of signatures for
nominating petitions); Cartwright v. Barnes, 304 F.3d 1138, 1140-42 (11th Cir.
2002); see also Swanson v. Worley, 490 F.3d 894, 910 (11th Cir. 2007) (upholding
Alabama’s 3% requirement where no independent or minor party candidate had
obtained ballot access when nothing indicated that similar potential candidates had
sought ballot access). The pertinent laws of Georgia have not changed materially
since the decisions in Jenness and Cartwright were made.
AFFIRMED.
3