No Labels is facing a barrage of legal challenges and complaints from Democratic allies and groups hoping to put an end to the third-party organization’s ballot access initiative. However, the group, undeterred, called the lawsuits “frivolous without merit” and said they expose the cynicism and hypocritical nature of the two-party system.
Ryan Clancy, a chief strategist for No Labels, said in an interview with the Washington Examiner that the legal efforts to prevent a unity presidential ticket in the 2024 election are an organized effort to shut down voters’ voices.
“The two parties right now have zero standard, zero, to criticize anything we’re doing or any other independent voice out there, given the fact that they have done everything humanly possible within their own parties to make sure that voters don’t have an actual choice,” Clancy said.
No Labels officials have repeatedly said their participation in the 2024 election is contingent on the Democratic and Republican nominees, but they are searching to find alternatives for voters who do not want to see a repeat of the 2020 election between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump.
However, Clancy said Democrats and Republicans have “virtually guaranteed” that voters will see Biden’s and Trump’s names on the ballots by blocking avenues for all other opponents.
“You look at the Democratic side, where they rejigger the primary calendar to favor Biden,” Clancy said. “They won’t have debates. They won’t even let Dean Phillips on the ballot. They just sort of unilaterally kicked them off in Florida, North Carolina, and everywhere else.”
The strategist also pointed to a drafted resolution from the Republican National Committee that would have declared Trump the “presumptive 2024 nominee” before he clinches the number of delegates needed, which was reportedly scrapped.
Clancy said if the parties are upset at independent groups trying to offer a unity ticket, they have themselves to blame.
“If there’s people in the parties who are frustrated about the competition that’s emerging, they can blame themselves and their efforts to try to shut down every single avenue that voters have to actually have some different voices in the process,” Clancy said.
Democratic groups such as Third Way have accused the group of a “secret plot” to prevent Biden’s reelection, arguing that a third-party candidate will draw votes away from Biden and aid a GOP victory. A survey taken in June 2023 found that a “moderate independent candidate” would hand Trump a narrow win, while naming someone like former Maryland Republican Gov. Larry Hogan as a third-party option had Biden and Trump nearly tied.
Dan Webb, a lawyer volunteering to assist No Labels, said in an interview that the parties are hiding behind the excuse of “spoilers” to offset their fears of competition.
“They have the same data we have. The data out there, by the way, just shows that we are drawing votes roughly from both parties and about the same amounts,” Webb said.
“They want to have the market for themselves,” Webb said, relating the matter to his work with antitrust cases. “These two parties believe that effort over the decades of time, they own our democracy, and that’s just wrong. It’s unfair. And it’s not legally correct.”
Recently, End Citizens United and Accountable.US filed campaign finance complaints with the IRS, alleging that No Labels is abusing its nonprofit status and is acting like a political party, so it should be required to disclose donors.
End Citizens United listed in its complaint that No Labels appears to be primarily engaged in political activity “to oppose the candidacies of Joe Biden and Donald Trump.” Accountable.US filed a complaint in Colorado, accusing the group of failing to file quarterly campaign reports, which are required under state law. The groups’ goal is to send the complaints to the 14 states where No Labels has gained ballot access as an independent political party.
Clancy said the Democratic-aligned groups are “just throwing things against the wall” and dismissed their validity. He said that, unlike the RNC or Democratic National Committee, No Labels is not fielding candidates up and down the ballot, engaging in election activity every year, or spending resources to get a candidate elected in a general election.
“This ballot access campaign that we launched two years ago, it’s something that we’ve said from the beginning: We’re doing only for one office and for this one election,” Clancy said. “And if No Labels ends up putting up a unity ticket, it’s not going to help fund or run a campaign. That would be the responsibility of the campaign itself.”
Clancy added that No Labels expects to be on the ballot in 32 states. The other 18 states have ballot access requirements that make it more difficult to push a third-party initiative forward, such as needing to name a candidate explicitly. If there is a unity ticket, Clancy said, the campaign of that candidate would be responsible for getting over the finish line in those 18.
“We’re very confident that, in the end, a unity ticket would be able to compete in all 50,” the strategist said.
Brad Schlozman, former acting United States assistant attorney general who is now a lawyer working with No Labels in Kansas, said in an interview that the legal challenges are “baseless” and dangerous to voters.
“Ultimately, the victim is not just No Labels. It’s the voters who are being deprived of the ability to vote for the candidate of their choice and to have a — you know, being able to have something different of a choice than just the candidates for the two leading parties,” Schlozman said.
On Jan. 18, No Labels filed a complaint with the Justice Department requesting an investigation into the Democratic-allied organizations it alleges are trying to interfere with its ballot access initiative. Clancy pointed to a complaint filed by the Arizona Democratic Party in March 2023 that sought to challenge its ballot access despite the state’s secretary of state granting access.
No Labels won the case, and Clancy said the state party’s arguments highlighted the real reason why Democrats are afraid of a third-party initiative, particularly in Arizona, where the once-solid Republican stronghold has been trending blue in recent elections. In the court filing, Arizona Democrats argued that No Labels will force the party to “expand and divert additional funds and staff time on voter education to accomplish its mission in Arizona.”
“In other words, they actually put in a legal filing they think one of the justifications for keeping competition off the ballots is that it might actually force them to have to persuade voters and actually do work to win elections,” Clancy said.
“As a partisan, you can think it might make it harder for you to win elections, but how can you think that that is an appropriate legal justification to ask the courts to keep this group off the ballot explicitly because, ‘Hey, this is going to make our lives a little harder at the ballot box,'” Clancy added. “That’s a joke, and it gives away the game that all this talk about protecting democracy is really just about protecting turf.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
He said that if he could make a plea to Democrats and Republicans, it would be to ask them why a third-party initiative is gaining such popularity.
“You’d be a lot better served spending less time trying to shut down independent voices and spend more time wondering, ‘Why is it that voters are so hungry for them in the first place?'” Clancy said.
