A U.S. District Court denied a request from gubernatorial candidate and Independent State Senator H. Russell Potts, Jr. for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction Friday. The motion would have prohibited any public gubernatorial debate, including last night's debate hosted by the University's Center for Politics, that did not include Potts.
Potts, an independent candidate for governor, and his campaign, filed suit Thursday against the Center and its Director, Larry J. Sabato, following the Center's decision that Potts did not meet the criterion for participation. The Center announced in August that independent candidates must receive at least 15 percent support in two public opinion polls prior to Oct. 6.
In his decision, released Friday evening, U.S. District Judge Norman K. Moon sided with Sabato and the Center, finding that the Center's criterion for candidates were reasonable impositions given the circumstances, while also acknowledging that Potts' candidacy might suffer as a result of the decision.
"If [the Center's] 15 percent criterium were overturned, its goal of building a politically informed and educated public would, paradoxically, be shaken," Moon wrote in his decision. "The 15 percent restriction serves as a reasonable cut-off to limit participation to candidates who actually have the potential to win the election. The 15 percent restriction is thus reasonable in light of the purpose of the televised debate."
In the oral arguments Friday afternoon, Daniel A. Carrell, attorney for Potts and his campaign, painted the inclusion of Potts as in the best interest of the public.
"An informed electorate is the cornerstone of our democracy," Carrell said. "If this candidate is blocked from participating, the future for any independent candidate or third-party candidate is going to receive a message of 'Don't bother.'"
Carrell further argued Potts already had demonstrated "appreciable public support" by satisfying the General Assembly's requirements for candidates. Therefore, any extra restrictions imposed by the Center were unreasonable.
In response, William Broadus, attorney for the Center and Sabato, argued that the Center's criteria were both rational and reasonable --- the same cut-off measure used for presidential debates.
"It was not Dr. Sabato who made the decision to exclude a particular individual," Broadus said. The Center "instituted fair, objective criteria."
Following the hearing, Sabato reiterated his position, indicating the Center had imposed the 15 percent rule in previous races as well.
Fifteen percent "is the standard criteria used throughout America," Sabato said. "It applied in both the Senate race in 2002 and the gubernatorial race in 2001. You can't go around arbitrarily changing the rules to benefit one candidate in one year."
Neither Potts nor his campaign could be reached for comment on the decision.
Sabato indicated he was pleased with the ruling.
"I am delighted that this baseless lawsuit has been quickly dismissed, and that now we can go about serving the voters of Virginia by presenting them with their only statewide TV debate Sunday at 7 p.m.," Sabato said in the e-mail statement released after the verdict.
Read More
U.Va. loses over $60 million in federal research cuts
By Bertie Azqueta | YesterdayThe impacted grants include three from the NIH, seven from the NEH, one from the United States Agency for International Development and four from the State Department.
Department of Education reverses course, awards Federal Executive Institute to U.Va.
By Ford McCracken | 3 days agoThe ED had previously awarded the institute to Charlottesville City Schools.
Students reflect on the life and legacy of Pope Francis
By Bertie Azqueta | 4 days agoAt the University, students shared a range of perspectives on his legacy of reform, inclusivity and his impact on the global Catholic community.
