## Facts

- Washington amended RCW § 29.18.110 to require minor-party and independent candidates to obtain at least 1% of the votes cast for the office in the state primary to appear on the general election ballot.
- Washington used a blanket primary permitting any registered voter to vote for any candidate regardless of party affiliation.
- The Socialist Workers Party’s nominee for U.S. Senate, Dean Peoples, qualified for the primary ballot but received less than 1% of the votes cast for that office.
- The Secretary of State denied Peoples a place on the general election ballot under the statute.
- The Socialist Workers Party, Peoples, and supporting voters sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the 1% requirement violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by burdening associational rights and the right to cast an effective vote.

## Issues

1. Whether a state may require minor-party and independent candidates to receive at least 1% of the votes cast in a primary election as a condition of access to the general election ballot.
2. Whether such a threshold unconstitutionally burdens First and Fourteenth Amendment rights absent proof of actual ballot overcrowding, voter confusion, or frivolous candidacies.
3. Whether using primary-election votes, rather than petition signatures, is a constitutionally significant difference for demonstrating the required support.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and upheld RCW § 29.18.110.
- The Court held that Washington may require a preliminary showing of substantial support—here, 1% of primary votes—to place a candidate on the general election ballot.
- The State was not required to prove actual voter confusion or ballot overcrowding before adopting a reasonable access restriction.
- The Court rejected arguments that a primary-vote threshold is materially different from, or more suspect than, petition-signature requirements, and found no constitutional defect based on generally lower primary turnout.

## Legal Principles

- States may impose reasonable ballot-access conditions to protect the integrity and orderly administration of elections, including limiting ballots to candidates with a significant modicum of support.
- Ballot-access restrictions are evaluated by weighing the character and magnitude of the burden on voting and associational rights against the state interests served and the fit between means and ends; no single mechanical test controls.
- A state need not wait for demonstrated ballot overcrowding or voter confusion before enacting modest thresholds intended to prevent cluttered ballots and reduce factionalism.
- Requiring support to be shown through primary-election votes, rather than nominating petitions, is not constitutionally decisive when the requirement functions as a minimal support threshold.

## Conclusion

Washington’s 1% primary-vote requirement for minor-party and independent candidates was a permissible, modest ballot-access regulation that served legitimate state interests and did not impose an unconstitutional burden on First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.


Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 (1986)