MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION ...

in multi-town districts, out of a total of 669 who have sought reelection since 1980, havefaced a primary challenge. Id.The disparity between the numbers of primaries in multi-town and single-towndistricts – particularly when the incumbent is seeking reelection – is strong evidence ofthe burdens imposed by the ballot access rules for multi-town districts.C. The Burdens Imposed by this System Are Deterring Bona Fide Candidatesfrom Running for Office This Year and Will Deny Voters in those Districtsthe Opportunity to Participate in their Party’s Nomination Process.Every election year, bona fide candidates choose not to seek their party’snomination in multi-town districts because the burdens on primary ballot access aresimply too steep. See Caplan Decl. at 6; Campbell Decl. at 21; Byrnes Decl. at 11.Thus, every election cycle, rank and file party members in multi-town State housedistricts have significantly less opportunity to participate in their party’s nominationprocess than their neighbors in single-town districts, where primaries are more frequentand access to the ballot is possible without the approval of party leadership. SeeMcLoughlin Decl. at Exhibit C. See also Byrnes Decl. at 11; Haave Decl. at 16.Every election year, in congressional races where the incumbent seeks re-election,members of the incumbent’s party are shut out of the nominating process by a ballotaccess system that deters challengers from even trying to get on the ballot. See, e.g.,Nielsen Decl. at 15-16.This election year is no different. Plaintiff Campbell, for instance, is not going tomount another campaign to get on the ballot for the Republican primary in the 4 thCongressional District under the current ballot access regime. See Campbell Decl. at 21.He believes such an effort is futile. Id. Republican voters in the 4 th Congressional16