Gould v. Grubb

Pursuant to the election procedures of Santa Monica City, California (the city) (defendant), incumbent candidates in upcoming city-council elections were listed first on the election ballots, i.e., given top ballot positions. Renee Gould and other nonincumbent candidates (collectively, the nonincumbent candidates) (plaintiffs) sued the city in California Superior Court, asserting that the unequal treatment of incumbent candidates versus nonincumbent candidates violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. At trial, the nonincumbent candidates presented expert testimony that candidates with top ballot positions had a significant advantage and received a substantial number of votes based solely on their ballot positions. But the city argued that even if such an advantage existed for candidates with top ballot positions, control over the contents of ballots was within the city election officials’ discretion. The city further argued that it had a legitimate interest in giving incumbent candidates top ballot positions to avoid confusion among voters as to which candidate was the incumbent, making the voting process less confusing and more efficient. The superior court found that the city’s ballot procedure created an impermissible advantage for incumbent candidates over nonincumbents in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The city appealed to the California Supreme Court.