A Wyoming law prohibiting failed primary election candidates from seeking the same office as an independent in the general election is unconstitutional, claims a lawsuit filed Wednesday afternoon in Laramie County District Court.
Matt Malcom, who unsuccessfully ran for the Republican nomination in Cheyenne’s House District 61 during the primary, and former Wilson lawmaker Jim Roscoe are the suit’s two plaintiffs.
Roscoe represented House District 22 as a Democrat from 2009 to 2012, and then as an independent from 2019 to 2022. Malcom lost his primary bid to the incumbent, Freedom Caucus member Rep. Daniel Singh (R-Cheyenne), who secured 59% of the vote.
“While Malcom sought the nomination of the Republican party, his desire to serve as an elected representative of House District 61 supersedes his desire to be the nominee of any political party,” the complaint states. “Therefore, Malcom wishes to run for that office in the general election as an independent candidate.”
“Residents in my district have reached out to voice their frustrations with our election system. They are upset that now they will have no choice on the November ballot,” Malcom said in a press release. “This is about freedom at the polls. Wyomingites deserve more choices on the ballot. More competition will force candidates to earn constituent votes by talking about the issues that matter.”
Following his primary loss, Malcom attempted to file to run as an independent candidate, the complaint states, but Secretary of State Chuck Gray rejected the petition, pointing to the state law that disqualifies him.
“An unsuccessful candidate for office at a primary election, whose name is printed on any party ballot, may not seek nomination by petition for the same office at the next general election,” according to state statute.
Roscoe did not run for office this election, but has concerns that Wyoming’s major political parties have become increasingly dominated by national political interests, extremism and hostility to members of the opposing party, according to the complaint, “all of which are making it more difficult to achieve reasonable consensus solutions for the people of Wyoming.”
Known as a “sore loser law,” the statute was enacted in Wyoming in 1973, according to Ballotpedia. But the suit claims the law is at odds with the state’s constitution, specifically a provision that requires that “the laws of this state affecting the political rights and privileges of its citizens shall be without distinction or race, color, sex, or any circumstance or condition whatsoever, other than individual incompetency, or unworthiness duly ascertained by a court of competent jurisdiction.”
“We are seeking a judicial declaration that Wyoming’s laws prohibiting a candidate who is unsuccessful in a party primary from running in the general election as an independent violates the Wyoming State Constitution,” William Schwartz, an attorney for the plaintiffs, wrote in a press release. “These laws unconstitutionally infringe upon Matt Malcom’s political rights to run as an independent candidate and Jim Roscoe’s political rights as an independent voter.”
The suit names Gray in his capacity as secretary as the defendant.
“The statute is there for a good reason, in order to prevent candidates from circumventing the primary election process by running as an independent after losing their primary,” Gray said in an email to WyoFile.
Gray also said his office rejected Malcom’s petition because it lacked his signature and Malcom did not obtain approval from the secretary of state’s office before circulating the petition for signatures — both of which are required by Wyoming law.
This is a breaking news story and may be updated.
Correction: This story has been updated to correct the year the Wyoming Legislature passed a “sore loser law.” —Ed.
We need to eliminate the Major Party distinction as there is currently only one Major Party.
Each Party should be responsible for selecting who best represents the party and the people within their respective communities.
A General Election would include the names submitted by any party representative of each specific community.
We live in a Representative, Constitutional Republic. It’s not a Democracy, as so many claim. Words do matter.
Yes, words do matter> The United States is a representative democracy.
Wyoming should do away with party primaries and adopt a ranked choice voting system. It’s the only way to have true democracy,
I wouldn’t have given this provision a second thought until Wyoming’s political landscape changed so much in the last 10 years. In a local election a moderate republican incumbent (a victim of the out-of-state PAC smear mailings) closely lost the primary to a far right opponent (less than 100 votes) in a very low turn out election. The winner will run uncontested in the general election as Dems don’t stand a chance in this area. Being a Dem who registers as a republican so I can have my vote count as we have too many races like this, my first thought is the moderate should run as a write-in, not thinking about him running as an independent. Because write-in campaigns are so much harder, should he be able to run as an independent, I truly think he could win as I have no doubt most Dems would vote for him and I also think when there is a larger pool voting in general I think he would have a better chance. I just really hate that primaries are taking the place of general elections. If we want voters to truly have a voice in who our elected officials are, then voters should have as many choice as possible.
So, I interpret your comment “voters should have as many options as possible” to mean the same thing as don’t do primaries at all, and we’ll just see everybody in November.
Why wouldn’t he have run as a Democrat? That would get him on the ballot in the general election, wouldn’t it? By your theory, a “moderate Republican” who appeals to Democrats can win in the general election, so why couldn’t a “moderate Democrat” who appeals to moderate Republicans win? The simple fact is that those people you claim are “moderate Republicans” and republicans call Rinos are Democrats. The Wyoming democratic party is just such a pathetic organization that they can’t run a credible race, so the rinos run as Republicans. This is due to a serious lack of honesty and leadership among them. Pathetic. Run as what you are. If you want to appear as an independant on the general ballot, don’t claim to be a Republican. If you want to govern as a democrat, don’t run as a Republican. If you just want to lie to people, you don’t deserve an elected office.
I suggest that were it a Freedumb caucus member who filed the suit that gray would back them up and be first in line to get the rule changed. It actually should be changed. Especially now that gray got crossover voting stopped. Literally we no longer have a right to vote. They rule and they are making sure nothing can be challenged. It is totally against our constitutional right to vote.
The Two Party system has failed.
Having said that , nobody should get a Mulligan in a round of elections. Of course, if Trump somehow manages to get re-elected ( a Supreme Mulligan ) , then cheating at golf and elections will become widely acceptable practice.
The plaintiffs have a point. Candidates should not be denied their right to run for office because a party didn’t support them; this gives parties undue control.
P.S. – The headline is also badly worded. “Rejects?” Nope. Just not as popular with the members of ONE political party (not necessarily the public at large) as someone else who was running. And, in these days of partisan polarization and extremism, perhaps the one who didn’t win because he or she was moderate.