December 31st, 2007
On December 28, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court construed one particular state law favorably to ballot access, in the case titled In re: Nomination Petition of Paulmier, no. 172 EAL 2007.
The issue was a provision in the Pennsylvania Ethics Act that requires candidates for state and local office to reveal the sources of their income. The act does not apply to federal candidates. The Court ruled that if a candidate files the financial disclosure on time, and the form has an omission or error, the candidate may correct the error later. By contrast, the lower court had tried to keep the candidate off the ballot (the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had ordered him back on to the ballot, but until December 28, had not explained its reasoning).
The particular candidate in this case was Greg Paulmier, a Democrat who was running for Philadelphia city council.
The Court also ruled that in the case of a self-employed candidate, the law doesn’t require him or her to list all the people whom he does business with. It is sufficient for the candidate to reveal the name of his or her business, without trying to list all the customers of that business.