By Howard Fischer
Mail | X: @azcapmedia

PHOENIX — Arizonans can’t run for office under the No Labels banner unless the party gives them permission.

In a new ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge John Tuchi barred Secretary of State Adrian Fontes from accepting any requests by any individual — including those registered with the party — to be a candidate in the 2024 primary election.

The decision also means that it will be the party that decides if it wants to run candidates for president and vice president in the general election.

Fontes criticized the judge’s decision, and not only because of the immediate impact on those who already have filed to run as No Labels candidates for various offices. He said the ruling, unless overturned, could pave the way for other political parties to decide that they, too, want final say over who does — and does not — get to run as a candidate.

What it also does, Fontes said, is disenfranchise nearly 19,000 Arizonans who have chosen to register as members of the No Labels Party who presumably want a say in who are the party’s candidates.

“If it stands, it could potentially derail the entire candidate nomination process” he said in a prepared statement.

But Tuchi, in a 12-page ruling, said the state can’t impose its laws in cases when a party does not want to offer a candidate for office.

The party was founded in 2009 with the stated goal of combating what it calls the “polarized political climate” that has led to the most prominent voices “often found the farthest from the center.” It has advanced the goal of creating a “unity ticket” to run in the 2024 presidential race “if the two parties select unreasonably divisive presidential nominees.”

But since filing the paperwork to get ballot status in Arizona, a half-dozen individuals have filed statements of interest to run as No Labels candidates in various other races. That led the party to sue Fontes to keep their names off the ballot.

Tuchi said that is the party’s constitutional right.

“The First Amendment protects the right to associate with others to exercise the freedom of speech expressly protected by the text of the First Amendment, including the freedom to join together in furtherance of common political beliefs,” he wrote.

Fontes did not dispute that right. But he also argued the party’s “freedom of association ends where the fundamental political rights of other begin,” including the right to vote.

And that he said, outweighs what he called the party’s “nomination-by-fiat preference.”

The judge disagreed.

“Arizona voters do not have the right to select a nominee for an office the party is not seeking,” Tuchi wrote. And he said an argument by Fontes that individual members of the No Labels party have the right to appear on the ballot as their party’s candidate is “unsupported in case law.”

“The (No Labels) Party has First Amendment rights to define the boundaries and structure of its association, including what offices it intends to seek,” the judge wrote.

This isn’t the first litigation involving the party and its presence in Arizona.

The Arizona Democratic Party filed suit last year to keep the party — and, more to the point, its candidates — off the 2024 ballot. Attorneys for the Democrats argued No Labels did not meet the legal definitions of a party, citing among other things its refusal to disclose donors, which is a requirement of all other parties.

But Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Katherine Cooper said No Labels had met all the legal requirements to qualify for ballot status.

At least part of the fight about No Labels is political.

A third-party contender for president could have implications for Democrat Joe Biden in 2024, particularly in Arizona. He only narrowly edged out Donald Trump by 10,457 votes in 2020.