CHEYENNE, Wyo. — A legal battle has sparked this week as two former political candidates challenge state election laws. Matthew Malcom and Jim Roscoe filed a lawsuit on Aug. 28 against Secretary of State Chuck Gray, alleging that current election rules violate their constitutional rights.
Matthew Malcom, a member of the Air National Guard and a University of Wyoming student, recently ran for the Wyoming House of Representatives in District 61. After losing the Republican primary on Aug. 20 by just 153 votes out of 859 cast, Malcom attempted to run as an independent in the general election. However, Secretary of State Gray rejected Malcom’s petition, citing Wyoming statutes that disqualify candidates from running as independents if they’ve already lost a primary race, according to the filed lawsuit.
In response to the lawsuit, Secretary of State Chuck Gray issued a statement defending his decision to reject Malcom’s petition.
“The ban on unsuccessful primary candidates running as independents is clear and unambiguous. This is a deeply troubling, desperate lawsuit,” Gray said. He referred to the “sore loser” statute, W.S. 22-5-302, which states, “An unsuccessful candidate for office at a primary election, whose name is printed on any party ballot, may not seek nomination by petition for the same office at the next general election.”
Gray emphasized that this law is essential to prevent candidates from circumventing the primary election process. He also pointed out that Malcom’s petition had another issue: It was unsigned.
In an op-ed sent to Cap City News, Malcom explained his decision to challenge the law, stating, “This wasn’t a decision I took lightly.” After conceding the primary race, Malcom states he received overwhelming support from constituents who urged him to run as an independent. He quickly gathered 60 signatures — more than the 36 Malcolm states is required — to appear on the Nov. 5 general election ballot.
However, the Secretary of State’s office rejected his petition due to the “sore loser” statute and the lack of approval prior to circulation. Additionally, Gray’s office noted in its rejection letter that Malcom’s petition was not signed.
Malcom, represented by the law firm Parsons Behle & Latimer, argues that these statutes infringe on his rights under Article I, Section 3 of the Wyoming Constitution. Article I, Section 3 guarantees equal political rights and privileges, stating that “the laws of this state affecting the political rights and privileges of its citizens shall be without distinction of race, color, sex, or any circumstance or condition whatsoever other than individual incompetency, or unworthiness duly ascertained by a court of competent jurisdiction.”
Article I, Section 27 emphasizes that “Elections shall be open, free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent an untrammeled exercise of the right of suffrage.”
“Residents in my district have reached out to voice their frustrations with our election system. They are upset that now they will have no choice on the November ballot,” Malcom stated. He emphasizes that the case is about “freedom at the polls” and believes that “Wyomingites deserve more choices on the ballot.”
Joining Malcom in the lawsuit is Jim Roscoe, a former state representative who served House District 22, representing Lincoln, Sublette, and Teton counties. Roscoe, once a Democrat who later ran as an independent, argues that the law also infringes on voters’ rights to support independent candidates. He believes that increasing candidate options could help moderate the growing polarization in Wyoming politics.
Roscoe, who has lived in Wyoming for over 50 years, expresses concern that the major political parties are becoming increasingly extreme. He argues that more independent candidates could provide balanced, reasonable solutions for the state’s challenges.
Malcom’s op-ed further underscores the broader implications of the lawsuit. He argues that the lack of choices on the ballot undermines representative democracy.
“Only 10% of the voters will decide who represents the district, a situation that does not accurately reflect the state of Wyoming,” Malcom wrote. He also launched a write-in campaign for the general election, emphasizing his commitment to representing House District 61.
The plaintiffs are seeking a declaratory judgment that would invalidate the statutes preventing Malcom from running as an independent.
“We are seeking a judicial declaration that Wyoming’s laws prohibiting a candidate who is unsuccessful in a party primary from running in the general election as an independent violates the Wyoming State Constitution,” Malcom’s attorney, William Schwartz, stated.
The case will proceed in Laramie County’s First Judicial District Court, with both sides expected to present their arguments in the coming weeks.
