1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 460 F.3d
  5. 460 F.3d 1108 (2006)
 

WASHINGTON STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY v. WASHINGTON

Nos. 05-35774, 05-35780.

460 F.3d 1108 (2006)

WASHINGTON STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY; Diane Tebelius; Bertabelle Hubka; Steve Neighbors; Mike Gaston; Marcy Collins; Michael Young, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and Washington State Democratic Central Committee; Paul Berendt; Libertarian Party of Washington State; Ruth Bennett; J.S. Mills, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees, v. State of WASHINGTON; Rob McKenna, Attorney General; Sam Reed, Secretary of State; Washington State Grange, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Filed August 22, 2006.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rob McKenna, Maureen A. Hart, Jeffrey T. Even and James K. Pharris (argued), Office of the Washington Attorney General, Olympia, WA, for the State of Washington (defendant-intervenor-appellant).

Thomas F. Ahearne (argued), Ramsey Ramerman and Rodrick J. Dembowski, Foster Pepper & Shefelman PLLC, Seattle, WA, for the Washington State Grange (defendant-intervenor-appellant).

John J. White, Jr. (argued) and Kevin B. Hansen, Livengood, Fitzgerald & Alskog, Kirkland, WA, for the Washington State Republican Party (plaintiff-appellee).

David T. McDonald (argued) and Jay Carlson, Preston Gates & Ellis, LLP, Seattle, WA, for the Washington State Democratic Central Committee (plaintiff-intervenor-appellee).

Richard Shepard (argued), Shepard Law Office, Inc., Tacoma, WA, for the Libertarian Party of Washington State (plaintiff-intervenor-appellee).

Before D.W. NELSON, PAMELA ANN RYMER and RAYMOND C. FISHER, Circuit Judges.

FISHER, Circuit Judge.

For the second time in three years, political parties in Washington State are challenging the constitutionality of their state's partisan primary system, which was enacted as a result of the passage of Initiative 872 in the November 2004 state general election. In 2003, we concluded that Washington's previous "blanket" primary system was unconstitutional because it was "materially indistinguishable from the California scheme held to violate...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases