New Jersey’s Primary Election: The End of an Era or Just the Beginning of a New Battle?
For the first time in decades, New Jersey’s infamous ballot design, which has long been a tool for political bosses to maintain their grip on power, will be absent in next month’s crowded gubernatorial primary election. This shift is a significant victory for progressives, who managed to dismantle the so-called county line just a year ago. However, these reform-minded Democrats are now voicing concerns that remnants of this outdated system could resurface, and they assert that only a decisive federal court ruling can ensure its permanent demise. They fear that without such a verdict, New Jersey’s entrenched political powers might devise clever ways to undermine the principle of truly open primaries.
A protracted legal struggle over the constitutionality of the county line continues in federal court. The progressive plaintiffs, including Democratic Senator Andy Kim and the New Jersey Working Families Party, are advocating for a definitive ruling on the matter. Meanwhile, two county clerks and a local party organization—both Democratic—are staunchly opposed to the plaintiffs’ position.
“The county line system is part of our political past,” Kim emphasized in a statement. “I want to ensure it is recognized as unconstitutional so it can never return.”
Historically, candidates endorsed by county parties in most New Jersey counties were grouped together on the ballot, from presidential candidates down to local council members. Those who challenged the establishment without a slate often found themselves relegated to what has been colloquially termed “ballot Siberia.” This placement frequently dictated election outcomes, granting party leaders significant influence over results through their endorsements.
This era came to a close following the 2024 Democratic Senate primary, a direct consequence of Kim’s lawsuit, which echoed and expedited a slower 2020 case brought by several unsuccessful Democratic candidates. In March 2024, U.S. District Court Judge Zahid Quraishi issued a preliminary injunction against the county line—but notably, this ruling applied exclusively to Democrats.
In light of this decision, Democratic Governor Phil Murphy signed a new law mandating that primary candidates from both parties be organized by the office they aspire to, rather than by party endorsement. The law also prohibits county clerks from segregating candidates based on party affiliation for the same office. Nevertheless, critics argue that future legislation could erode these anti-line provisions, and local officials might exploit loopholes unless a clear court precedent is established.
“The legislation has made significant strides in ensuring we don’t revert to the worst features of the county line,” remarked Antoinette Miles, executive director of the New Jersey Working Families Party. “However, to fully safeguard against the re-emergence of ballot manipulation, we need a conclusive court ruling.”
The absence of the county line has fostered one of the most competitive Democratic gubernatorial primaries in recent memory. Despite Rep. Mikie Sherrill receiving support from powerful Democratic organizations in Essex and Middlesex counties—typically a strong indicator of front-runner status—she is now merely a narrow front-runner. Her five challengers, including Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, former state Senate President Steve Sweeney, and New Jersey Education Association President Sean Spiller, all possess viable paths to the nomination. In contrast, the Republican primary for governor appears less crowded and, based on scant public polling, less competitive.
The county line was a pivotal issue in last year’s Senate primary leading up to its eventual abolition. Fulop and Baraka vocally opposed the system, while Gottheimer played a role in connecting Middlesex County Democrats with a prominent attorney who briefly defended it.
Months prior to New Jersey’s enactment of the new law, most county clerks involved in the lawsuit settled and agreed to eliminate the line. However, clerks in Bergen and Union counties have refused to settle, and the Camden County Democratic Committee—known for some of the most egregious instances of ballot design that favored party-endorsed candidates—continues to support them in court.
The attorneys representing the two clerks recently argued in court that the plaintiffs are pursuing the case primarily to secure legal fees, as a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision stipulates that they can only claim fees if they achieve a final ruling in their favor. The clerks noted that the 17 other county clerks who settled had collectively paid around $500,000 in legal fees to the plaintiffs’ lawyers and are reluctant to incur further costs.
“Plaintiffs seek to permanently enjoin a law that is no longer in effect simply because the Union and Bergen County Clerks had the audacity to not use taxpayer funds to pay the plaintiffs for merely adhering to state law as it existed at the time,” they contended.
The Camden County Democratic Committee countered, asserting that the case is moot since the original plaintiffs no longer have a personal interest in the outcome. They maintained that the defendants never had the opportunity to depose the plaintiffs’ witnesses who testified in favor of the preliminary injunction and argued that Quraishi’s initial decision was detrimental as it applied only to Democrats, not Republicans.
Even more provocatively, the Camden County Democrats contended that grouping candidates by party endorsement is a constitutional right. “Imposing limitations on political party organizations wishing to band together, while placing no restrictions on individuals acting alone, is a restraint on a political party organization’s freedom of association,” their brief stated.
The plaintiffs, who claim that the county clerks are effectively outsourcing the constitutional arguments to the Camden County Democrats, emphasize that the stakes extend beyond legal fees. They argue that the ballot design law did not fully align with Quraishi’s initial ruling, permitting candidates for multi-seat offices like state Assembly and county commissioner to “bracket.” Furthermore, they noted that certain clerks’ ballot designs for this primary fail to adhere to the law’s intent. For instance, on the Cherry Hill ballot, the Camden County Clerk provided one single oval for voters to select an entire slate of 74 Democratic committee candidates, which they argue violates the law’s requirement that each candidate should have an oval next to their name. The clerk’s office countered that listing each candidate with an oval would render it impossible to fit on a single page.
Yael Bromberg, an attorney for the plaintiffs, stressed the necessity of a final judgment to safeguard current and future voting rights in the state. “It’s time to put an end to the taxpayer-funded defense of a 75-year-old ballot design that has enabled a politics of exclusion and soft corruption, and to usher in a new era for democracy in New Jersey,” Bromberg asserted.
Meanwhile, attorneys for Union County and the Camden County Democrats have refrained from commenting on the matter, which continues to evolve.
While the complete reinstatement of the county line seems unlikely due to the new state law, it is not entirely off the table. Republican county parties, which largely remained on the sidelines during the battle over the line, are reportedly discussing the possibility of reviving it, despite the new law. Morris County Republican Chair Laura Ali, who heads the association of 21 New Jersey GOP chairs, admitted to POLITICO that she has an interest in reinstating the county line but prefers to wait until after the primary election to engage in detailed discussions with fellow party leaders. “After the election, at our next meeting, I’m sure we’ll all discuss the outcome and the merits of the ballot in its current form… and we’ll proceed from there,” Ali stated.
