5 U.S.C. § 1503
Nonpartisan candidacies permitted
Section 1502(a)(3) of this title does not prohibit any State or local officer or employee from being a candidate in any election if none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected at such election as representing a party any of whose candidates for Presidential elector received votes in the last preceding election at which Presidential electors were selected.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1971–1994 · leading case: Patterson v. Maricopa Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 865 P.2d 814 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
Patterson v. Maricopa Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 865 P.2d 814 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). “In interpreting the federal Hatch Act, the Fourth Circuit stated that: [T]he legislative design of 5 U.S.C. § 1503 ... permits state employees subject to the [Hatch] Act to engage in nonpartisan political activity, and even to run for elective offices provided those offices and…”
Lisa B. Williams v. U.S. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., & Off. of Special Couns. Governor's Off. for Individuals With Disabilities, 15 F.3d 46 (4th Cir. 1994). “5 U.S.C. § 1503 (1988) provides an exception to the Hatch Act for nonpartisan candidates.”
Mrs. Marjorie Brandon, Individually & on Behalf of All Persons Similarly Situated v. Sw. Mississippi Senior Servs., Inc., 834 F.2d 536 (5th Cir. 1987). “5 U.S.C. § 1503 provides: Section 1502(a)(3) of this title does not prohibit any State or local officer or employee from being a candidate in any election if none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected at such election as representing a party any of whose candidates for…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “5 U.S.C. § 1503 (1967). At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 5 C.”
Segars v. Fulton Cnty., Ga., 644 F. Supp. 682 (N.D. Ga. 1986). “Because this court has found the Ball Ground mayoral election to be non-partisan, 5 U.S.C. § 1503 which permits local employees to run for nonpartisan elective office controls.”
N. Virginia Reg'l Park Auth. v. United States Civil Serv. Comm'n, 437 F.2d 1346 (4th Cir. 1971). “§ 1502 (c) (4), as the appellants maintain, exempted the employee altogether from the prohibition against political activity? The appellants’ construction is also inconsistent with the legislative design of 5 U.S.C. § 1503 which permits state employees subject to the Act to…”
City of Buffalo, New York v. United States Dep't of Labor, & Patrick J. Crowley, Intervenor, 729 F.2d 64 (2d Cir. 1984). “In view of our disposition, we need not consider the question whether Crowley, by neither seeking nor obtaining the nomination of a political party, could have qualified under the exception of 5 U.S.C. § 1503 , which permits nonpartisan candidacies.”
Connecticut, Dept. of Human Resources v. United States Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 718 F. Supp. 125 (D. Conn. 1989). “Excluded from the prohibition against being a candidate for elective office is the situation in which “none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected at such election as representing a party any of whose candidates for Presidential elector received votes in the last…”
Untitled Texas Attorney Gen. Opinion (Tex. Att'y Gen. 1985). “5 U.S.C. §1503 .. County officers in Texas are partisan officers.”
State of Conn., DHR v. USMSPB, 718 F. Supp. 125 (D. Conn. 1989). “Excluded from the prohibition against being a candidate for elective office is the situation in which "none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected at such election as representing a party any of whose candidates for Presidential elector received votes in the last…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.