Skip to main content
Federal Court Defense2014Success

Rubin v. Bowen

Defending Voter Rights Over Partisan Ballot Access Claims

A second federal challenge targeted the Top Two primary, arguing it unconstitutionally burdened minor parties' access to the general election ballot. The court ruled that voter participation rights outweigh partisan ballot access claims.

2nd
legal challenge to Prop 14
2014
trial court upheld Top Two
2015
U.S. Supreme Court declined review
precedent — reinforced Boden ruling
The Background

Minor parties wanted guaranteed access to the general election ballot. The court said no — and that's what equal treatment looks like.

After IVP won the first challenge to Proposition 14 in Boden v. Secretary of State (2012), it was only a matter of time before a second challenge materialized. This time, it came from a different angle.

In 2011, the Green Party of Alameda County, the Libertarian Party of California, and the Peace and Freedom Party of California filed suit in Alameda County Superior Court. Their argument: the Top Two primary effectively eliminated minor party candidates from the general election ballot, since these candidates almost never finish in the top two during a primary. They claimed this violated their constitutional rights of association and equal protection.

The case was a direct test of a core principle behind Proposition 14 — that the primary election is a public process belonging to voters, not a private process belonging to political parties. Minor parties argued they were entitled to a spot on the November ballot. IVP argued that equal treatment means equal rules for everyone — and equal rules don't guarantee equal outcomes.

The Defense

Equal opportunity, not guaranteed outcomes.

IVP again intervened as a defendant, represented by the same legal team at Nielsen Merksamer that had defended Proposition 14 from the beginning. The defense argued that the Top Two system treats all candidates and all parties exactly the same — the requirements for getting on the primary ballot are minimal and identical regardless of party affiliation.

The case went through a prolonged legal process. The trial court initially allowed the ballot access claim to proceed to trial, but ultimately ruled in favor of IVP and the state in 2014, dismissing all claims. The plaintiffs appealed to the California Court of Appeal, which affirmed the lower court's ruling in January 2015 — just two weeks after oral arguments, well ahead of the 90-day deadline.

The court's language was unambiguous: minor parties have a right to fair and equal participation in the process by which officeholders are selected — but that right is satisfied by participation in an open nonpartisan primary where every candidate has an equal opportunity to advance. The California Supreme Court declined to hear the case, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in October 2015, making the ruling final.

Quick Facts
TypeState Court Case
Filed2011
Trial Ruling2014
Appeal AffirmedJanuary 2015
SCOTUS DeniedOctober 2015
IVP RoleIntervenor-Defendant
OutcomeWon — All Levels
Key Ruling

Voter participation rights outweigh partisan claims to guaranteed ballot access. Equal rules — not equal outcomes.

Related Reforms
Open Primaries for Every Voter
Timeline

Key Milestones

2011

Lawsuit Filed in Alameda County Superior Court

The Green, Libertarian, and Peace and Freedom parties file suit challenging Proposition 14, arguing that the Top Two system eliminates minor party candidates from the general election ballot and violates their constitutional rights.

2012

Boden v. Secretary of State Decided

While Rubin proceeds through the courts, the first challenge to Proposition 14 is defeated in Boden v. Secretary of State, establishing initial federal precedent for the Top Two system's constitutionality.

June 2013

Trial Court Allows Ballot Access Claim to Proceed

The judge tentatively rules that the minor parties' ballot access argument is strong enough to warrant a full trial — the first time a court has allowed a Top Two challenge to reach that stage.

September 2014

Trial Court Rules in IVP's Favor

After the full trial, the court dismisses all claims — ruling that the Top Two primary treats all parties and candidates equally, and that equal opportunity to participate in the primary satisfies constitutional requirements.

January 2015

California Court of Appeal Affirms

The appellate court affirms the ruling just two weeks after oral arguments. The court holds that minor parties have "a right to fair and equal participation" but that right is "satisfied by participation in an open nonpartisan primary."

October 2015

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Certiorari

The challengers' final appeal is rejected when the U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear the case. The ruling is now final at every level — Proposition 14's constitutionality is settled law.

What Rubin v. Bowen Reinforced

The ruling reinforced that the Top Two primary serves a compelling state interest in opening elections and that the rights of voters to participate outweigh partisan ballot access claims. With Boden and Rubin together, the constitutional foundation for nonpartisan primary reform was now tested, affirmed, and final.

1

Precedent Made Final

With the U.S. Supreme Court declining review, the constitutionality of California's Top Two primary is settled law — tested at every level of the judiciary.

2

Equal Rules, Not Equal Outcomes

The court affirmed that treating all candidates the same — regardless of party size — is what equal protection actually requires. No party is entitled to a guaranteed spot on the ballot.

3

Voters Over Parties — Again

For the second time, a court ruled that the state's interest in giving all voters meaningful participation in elections outweighs any party's claim to exclusive ballot access.

4

Double-Tested Durability

Reformers in other states can now point to two successful defenses — Boden from the party association angle, Rubin from the ballot access angle — covering the major legal attack vectors.

The Constitution protects the right of every voter to an equal voice — not the right of any party to a guaranteed spot on the ballot. Rubin confirmed that principle at every level of the judiciary.

Independent Voter Project
Support the Legal Fight

Legal reform is expensive. Your support makes it possible.

Every court case IVP fights protects the right of every voter to participate in every election. Donate to help us defend what we've won, and extend it to every state.

Continue Reading

Related Cases

Landmark Legislation2010Passed

Proposition 14 — California Top Two Primary

IVP authored the ballot measure that replaced California's closed partisan primaries with a nonpartisan Top Two system — giving every voter access to every candidate on a single ballot.

Read the Full Story
Impact & Precedent

Nearly 40 million Californians now participate in a primary system that doesn't require party membership. Proposition 14 remains the most significant structural election reform in modern California history.

Federal Court Defense2012Success

Boden v. Secretary of State

After Proposition 14 passed, partisan interests immediately challenged it in federal court. IVP led the legal defense to protect the nonpartisan primary from being struck down.

Read the Full Case
Impact & Precedent

The court upheld the constitutionality of the Top Two system, establishing legal precedent that states can adopt nonpartisan primary reforms without violating party association rights.

Voter Rights Litigation2019Writ Filed to SCOTUS

Boydston v. Padilla

IVP challenged the state of California over the exclusion of independent voters from presidential primaries — arguing that taxpayer-funded elections must be open to all taxpayers.

Read the Full Case
Impact & Precedent

The court deferred to party autonomy for presidential primaries, and SCOTUS denied certiorari in October 2023 (144 S.Ct. 496). The case raised national awareness of the contradiction: voters fund elections they can't vote in.