Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Re Nomination Papers of Nader

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 29, 2004No. 154 MAP 2004Published

1ConcurrenceChief Justice Cappy

I join the majority opinion, and in particular Part II, regarding the procedural objections that Ralph Nader (“Nader”) and Peter Miguel Camejo (“Camejo”) (collectively, the “Candidates”) raised. I also agree with Part I of the majority opinion that Section 951(e) and Section 951.1 of Pennsylvania’s Election Code, 25 P.S. §§ 2911(e), 2911.1, do not disqualify Nader or Camejo from appearing on the Pennsylvania General Election ballot. I write separately to set forth an alternative *55rationale for this conclusion, which is based on statutory-construction. More specifically, I conclude that the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. In Re Nomination of CianfraniSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Patriot Party Of Allegheny County v. Allegheny County Department Of ElectionsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
  3. Packrall v. QuailSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. In Re Nomination Petition of SilcoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. In Re Nomination Paper of ZulickCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API