Just twelve days before Election Day, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled to allow contested Democratic primaries in Hartford and Enfield for state Representative to go forward.
The incumbents in both races had sued, questioning the validity of voter petition forms submitted by the challengers.
All parties agree: although challengers Venice Sotomayor and Tom Tyler acquired enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballots, the Secretary of the State’s office made a series of mistakes.
“In both cases, there was a defective petition sheet issued by the Secretary of the State’s office,” says the incumbents’ attorney, John Kennelly, “and numerous examples of contradictory or incorrect information given to the registrars.”
The petition form issued to both challengers did not include a required line tabulating the number of voter signatures on each page, and the forms were issued to Tyler by Enfield’s Democratic registrar before it was allowed, due to mistaken guidance from the Secretary.
Kennelly argued the errors by the Secretary of the State invalidate the challengers’ voter petition forms.
But, shortly after hearing the cases Thursday morning, the Supreme Court ruled the forms are valid. In Hartford (House District 4), challenger Venice Sotomayor will face incumbent Julio Concepcion, as scheduled, on August 11th. In Enfield (House District 58), challenger Tom Tyler will face incumbent John Santanella at a later date because the town already printed ballots without Tyler’s name after his loss in lower court.
“Venice Sotomayor and Tom Tyler didn’t do anything wrong,” says their attorney, Alex Taubes. “They collected the signatures they were required to collect, and the only mistakes that were made were made by the state.”
“What this ruling holds is that voters and candidates should not lose their chance to vote just because the state makes mistakes.”
The challengers claim incumbents Concepcion and Santanella sued on a technicality to prevent their respective primary challenges, something Santanella and attorney Kennelly deny.
“The argument that was being made was, ‘You have to abide by the law,’ irrespective of defective forms,” says Kennelly.
“The good news is justice prevailed,” says Tyler. “The bad news it’s very expensive for the town of Enfield and the taxpayers in Enfield to subsidize these shenanigans in order to try to keep somebody off a ballot.”
The Secretary of the State’s office has not returned a request for comment on this story.
