[ad_1]
INDIANAPOLIS — After Hoosiers were able to submit challenges regarding the upcoming 2024 Primary Election, the Indiana Election Commission will soon convene in public session to discuss these challenges.
According to a public session notice, the Indiana Election Commission will convene for a public meeting at 10 a.m. on Feb. 27 to discuss the various challenges brought forward in this primary. The meeting will be hosted at the Indiana Government Center South, located at 402 W. Washington Street in Indianapolis.
According to previous reports, Indiana residents are able to challenge the qualifications of a candidate. They are required to be a registered voter of the election district the candidate seeks to represent and file a sworn statement that questioned the candidate’s qualifications to seek the office and why they believe they are not eligible for the position.
During the meeting, the commission is expected to hear 30 challenges, as well as one commission motion to dismiss. According to the notice, the motion to dismiss consists of:
- Bartlett v. Carter surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for Indiana State Representative, District 95
According to the notice, the challenge hearings include:
- Kester v. Trump, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for President of the United States
- Whitley v. Biden, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States
- Wittman v. Dixon-Tatum, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for Governor
- Martin v. Nicholson, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Senate District 32
- Crooks v. Moore, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Eight
- Bohm v. Schrader, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Three
- Urick v. Shydale, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Representative 97
- Willis v. Brown, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Willis v. King, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Willis v. Pfenninger, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Dixon-Tatum v. McCormick, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for Governor
- Heuer v. Brown, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Heuer v. King, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Neal v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senator
- Shickles v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senator
- Williams v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senator
- Shields v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senator
- Stafford v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senator
- Bieniek v. Lester, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Four
- Dole v. Fox, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for State Representative District 68
- Baker v. Thompson, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Representative District 96
- Boyce v. Mahant, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Six
- Anderson v. Graves, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Senator District 34
- Heuer v. Pfenninger, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for U.S. Representative District Five
- Babcock v. Rust, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senate
- Camp v. Bonahoom, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for State Representative 82
- Hathaway v. Breaux, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Senate District 34
- Roy v. Dossett, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for Warrick Co. Superior Court Two
- Eldridge v. Shydale, surrounding the Democratic Party nomination for State Representative District 97
- Weingarten v. Banks, surrounding the Republican Party nomination for U.S. Senate.
According to previous reports, a candidate, or challenger, will be able to appeal the commissions’ respective determination on each challenge.
[ad_2]
Source link