Supreme Court rejects appeal of state's top-2 primary
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court has declined to take a new look at Washington state's top-two primary system amid complaints from political parties that it interferes with their rights.
The justices said they will not hear appeals from the state Democratic and Libertarian parties opposing a system that allows primary candidates to identify themselves as members of a party even when the party objects. The parties said the system could confuse voters.
But the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said there is no evidence of confusion and upheld the system. Under the top-two system, the top two finishers in a primary advance to the general election, even if they're both Democrats or both Republicans.
The Supreme Court upheld the system in 2008 but acknowledged there could be additional challenges.
The justices said they will not hear appeals from the state Democratic and Libertarian parties opposing a system that allows primary candidates to identify themselves as members of a party even when the party objects. The parties said the system could confuse voters.
But the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said there is no evidence of confusion and upheld the system. Under the top-two system, the top two finishers in a primary advance to the general election, even if they're both Democrats or both Republicans.
The Supreme Court upheld the system in 2008 but acknowledged there could be additional challenges.
Whatever... Republican vs. Democrat vs. liberal vs. conservative... G.O.P etc. (ridiculous) overpaid, overinflated and out of control Democracy. All of this is the equivalent of a non-working Congress for "we the people" my opinion.
Like it really makes any difference in blue state Washington..
anything that's bad for the two parties, is likely good for me...
Competition is good for all, upholding this law reduces competition to the two parties, freedom takes another hit.....
Because of this decision and the law it upholds, political parties no longer exist in Washington. Elections have been reduced to beauty contests. Maybe it doesn't matter, since initiative and referendum have reduced the legislature to window dressing. Whatever happened to the republic form of government that we used to pledge allegiance to?
I guess reading about what the PERSON stands for ... talking about the ISSUES is out of scope of your LEARNIG about who you think you should vote for.
 @krog Well considering the behavior of both political parties in the last several years I would be okay with them no longer existing. Maybe then Americans could step away from this asinine "us against them" mindset and instead vote for the best candidate for the job. Just a thought.
That would be great if it could happen. I'm tired of people always voting along party lines even if it's for the good of the country. No fair thinking outside the box. That is not part of our party mentality.
 @Petwlkr  @krog I feel a bit stupid, ignorant probably is a better word when it comes to this, so I have a question. I always got upset that I HAVE to pick ONE party when voting. I have never seen this to be ok in any way shape or form. What if I like a Dem for one thing, a Rep for another, and well..who else is there? An Independent? IDK, can you explain why this happened and who it benefits the most? Why should I have to declare if I just want the best person? I don't get it.
 @Furd HOLY COW FURD!! Thank you, that was the most intelligent, well written post, I understand completely. I should pay you for that answer.. :) Have a wonderful day!
 @Yeah_and In Washington state you do NOT have to declare a party preference. For many decades we enjoyed a "blanket primary" where you could vote for anyone regardless of party preference. Both of the major parties objected to this and cited "crossover voting as a problem.
Â
I don't remember which state but they also had a blanket primary and the parties challenged such in court and won. The Washington legislature saw the handwriting on the wall and before a court could rule against our blanket primary the legislature replaced it with one requiring the voter to declare a party preference on the ballot. We STILL did not require registering a party preference in our voter registration and to this day we do not register a party preference.
Â
However, there were challenges to the party preference primary and so the legislature then enacted the "top two" system we have now. Again the two major parties complained that (at least theoretically) "top two" could result in two people from the same party running against each other in the general election. So far any challenge to the "top two" has been either dismissed or found in favor of "top two".
Â
My take is that "top two" primary elections limits the general election to ONLY the two major political parties, it effectively silences the minority party voters. It totally eliminates a three or four way election. The voters are left to selecting one of two people who have high name recognition rather than being able to select from a list that might include better qualified but lesser known people.
Â
Further, the original reasoning behind primary elections was not so much in limiting voter options as it was in counting the votes cast. Now that all voting is mechanically/electronically counted there is no reason whatsoever in having a primary election EXCEPT that it favors the two major political parties. Since each of these two major parties want the primary to be a coronation for their selected candidate I have suggested for years that the parties cover the full expense of the primary election.