Matter of McCarthy v. Meisser, 22 N.Y.2d 315 (1968)

A person named or designated by a party or independent group as a candidate for President of the United States is privileged to decline such office and prevent their name from appearing on the ballot.

Summary

This case addresses whether a presidential candidate’s name can be placed on the New York ballot without their consent. Senator Eugene McCarthy explicitly declined any nominations for President in New York. Despite this, petitioners sought to have his name included. The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s order, reinstating the Secretary of State’s initial determination to exclude McCarthy’s name. The court held that a candidate’s consent is required to appear on the ballot, particularly when electors are committed to that candidate. The court specifically did not address the situation where electors are uncommitted.

Facts

Senator Eugene McCarthy was named as a candidate for President of the United States in New York. Senator McCarthy formally notified the Secretary of State that he declined any and all nominations for President or Vice President in any petition filed with the Secretary of State of New York. The Secretary of State initially refused to direct that Senator McCarthy’s name be placed on the ballot based on this declination.

Procedural History

The Secretary of State initially refused to place McCarthy’s name on the ballot. The Appellate Division reversed this determination, ordering McCarthy’s name to be placed on the ballot. The New York Court of Appeals then reversed the Appellate Division’s order, reinstating the Secretary of State’s original determination.

Issue(s)

Whether a person named or designated by a party or independent group as a candidate for the Presidency of the United States can prevent their name from appearing on the ballot by declining the nomination.

Holding

Yes, because a person named or designated as a candidate for President is privileged to decline such office and prevent their name from appearing on the ballot, especially when the proposed electors are committed to that particular presidential candidate. The court emphasized the importance of the candidate’s consent.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals reasoned that, within the context of New York’s Election Law, a candidate has the right to decline a nomination and prevent their name from appearing on the ballot. The court highlighted Senator McCarthy’s unequivocal declination of the nomination. The court emphasized that the proposed electors were committed to McCarthy, and because McCarthy was unwilling to have his name used, the proposed electors were disqualified. The court explicitly limited its holding to cases where electors are committed to a particular presidential candidate, explicitly stating, “Having chosen a candidate who is unwilling to have his name thus used the proposed electors in this case are disqualified under our law from being on the ballot. We do not pass on the question which may arise in cases where electors are not committed.” The court emphasized the initial action of the Secretary of State, noting that the Secretary initially refused to place McCarthy’s name on the ballot based on his explicit declination. The court stated, McCarthy was “declin[ing] any and all nominations which I may receive for the office of candidate for President and/or Vice President of the United States in any petition filed with the Secretary of State of the State of New York.”