High Court Weighs Blanket Primary

California's "blanket primary" is under fire at the highest court in the land.

The U.S. Supreme Court has heard arguments in the case of California Democratic Party v. Jones. Four political parties - the Democrats, the Republicans, the Libertarians, and the Peace and Freedom Party - are challenging the Golden State's freewheeling primary. That wide-open contest lets voters cast their ballots for any candidate regardless of party affiliation.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whose vote is often pivotal in close cases, called the state's primary system "tremendously intrusive" on the rights of political parties.

"The very essence of the party's right is to define its own message and decide its own candidates," O'Connor said. A primary election is when "the associational right of the party is at its zenith," she added.

The state's lawyer, Thomas Gede, argued a primary election "belongs to the voters," not to the political parties. But he faced sharp questions and comments from O'Connor, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy.

The lawyer for the political parties, George Waters, argued California's system is "a wholesale assault" on the parties' ability "to choose a standard bearer who best represents" their views. The blanket primary "makes ideology irrelevant," he said.

A decision by the high court - expected by late June - will likely determine the future of blanket primaries in Louisiana and Washington state as well. And various open-primary systems used in about half the states could be affected.

Waters said open primaries could be treated differently, but Gede said a decision invalidating California's system "would jeopardize open primaries all over the country."

In 1996, California voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative favoring a blanket primary. Backers said the system would encourage nomination of more moderate candidates. The four parties who filed the court challenge argued that letting nonparty members help choose their nominees violated their First Amendment freedom of association.

Among the friend-of-the-court advice the justices received in the case was a pro-blanket primary brief from Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who relied heavily on Democrats and independents in his Republican bid for the White House this year. Candidates with such appeals rely on open primaries to break the hold of state party organizations.

McCain got strong boosts from victories in New Hampshire and Michigan, states with open primaries, though in California he came in third behind Democrat Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush.

"A party has the right to limit its nominating process," Waters told the court, but Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, both of whom peppered him with questions, seemed to doubt that California has gone too far.

Gede said California's move to blanket priaries four years ago has resulted in greater participation among the state's 15 million registered voters - and has allowed 1.5 million independent voters to participate in the primary process.

But Scalia worried aloud that voters "with absolutely no commitment to a political party, not even for a day" are being allowed to help nominate a party's general election candidate.