The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Austin, charges that Texas' ballot access law is unconstitutional because it sets stricter standards for independent candidates than it does for third-party challengers.
I don't have an issue with the different requirements, because the state has an interest in helping to make the ballot understandable to voters. I'm sure the state would claim they do not want candidates on the ballot who are not serious about running. Third party candidates might have less a burden in Texas, but they still have to be selected by their party. Independents, on the contrary, have a little more stringent burden to get on the ballot.
My issue is more that volunteers for Nader have been banned from some street festivals and public university campuses in Texas. I'm sure that if his volunteers had been able to solicit signatures at University of Texas in Austin, he would have had more than enough to meet the requirements.
I guess the state thought it would be annoying to students to have volunteers soliciting their signatures. How is that any worse than being attacked by people with their "free gifts" for signing up for a credit card?
