Eliminates the ability of judicial candidates enrolled in a particular party to automatically be allowed to run as a candidate in another party's primary…

• Democratic16

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Rachel May says this is needed

Currently, candidates for office who are not enrolled in the political party whose nomination they seek must be authorized by that party to be the party's candidate or to run in that party's primary. The only exceptions are candidates running for judicial office, nominated by caucus, or running in a party in its first year (Election Law § 6-120). This situation allows judicial candidates to effectively "raid" the primary of another party. Most of the time, people do not know how a particular judicial candidate is enrolled. A Democratic judicial candidate can circulate a Republican petition without telling signers the candidate's own party enrollment (and vice versa). Voters seldom think to ask and simply assume that the candidate is a member of the party whose petition they are asked to sign. This exception for judicial candidates creates confusion with voters and often deprives voters of being able to vote for their party's endorsed candidate in the general election. Since primary turnout is lower than in a general election, a well-known or well financed candidate could win the other major party's primary and leave voters without a meaningful choice in November. Because of this exception, a judicial candidate running in a primary of a so-called "liberal" minor party could win because the candidate keeps secret the fact that the candidate is also running on the so-called "conservative" minor party. The reverse could also be true. Judicial candidates are limited in what they can say in a campaign, so the party lines on which a candidate appears is one of the few ways they can telegraph their values. So, if a judicial candidate wins the primary of a party whose values the candidate does not share, voters in November will be duped into thinking that the candidate actually shares that party's values. If another party wishes to have a judicial candidate who is not a member of that party run on that party's line or in that party's primary, the party should authorize the judicial candidate as a stamp of approval that the candidate shares that party's values - as it does for any other candidate. This bill would help restore integrity in judicial elections.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.