Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Ballot access for major and minor party candidates
 |
| Ballot access for major and minor party candidates |
|---|
| Ballot access for presidential candidates |
| Select a state below to learn more about ballot access requirements for candidates in that state. |
|
|
| Ballot access requirements for political parties in the United States |
| List of political parties in the United States |
| Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker |
Note: This article is not intended to serve as a guide to running for public office. Individuals should contact their state election agencies for further information.
|
In order to get on the ballot, a candidate or party must meet a variety of state-specific filing requirements and deadlines. These regulations, known as ballot access laws, determine whether and how a candidate or party can appear on an election ballot. These laws are set at the state level and apply to state and congressional candidates.
There are three basic methods by which an individual may become a candidate for office in a state.
- An individual can seek the nomination of a state-recognized political party.
- An individual can run as an independent. Independent candidates often must petition in order to have their names printed on the general election ballot.
- An individual can run as a write-in candidate.
For state-specific ballot access requirements, select a state from the map below. If on a mobile device, select a state from the dropdown menu below.
For additional information about ballot access requirements for presidential candidates, see this article.
Ballot access in 2025
The table below lists statewide primary dates and primary candidate filing deadlines in 2025.
| State | Election date | Filing deadline | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Jersey | June 10, 2025 | March 24, 2025 - New Jersey statewide primary candidate filing deadline | Source |
| Pennsylvania | May 20, 2025 | March 11, 2025 - Pennsylvania statewide primary candidate filing deadline | Source |
| Virginia | June 17, 2025 | April 3, 2025 - Virginia statewide primary candidate filing deadline | Source |
| Wisconsin | Feb. 18, 2025 | Jan. 7, 2025 - Wisconsin statewide spring primary candidate filing deadline | Source |
Court cases
Below is a listing of court cases relevant to ballot access law. These are listed in chronological order.
Williams v. Rhodes
- See also: Williams v. Rhodes
Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1968, Williams v. Rhodes held that state laws regulating the selection of presidential electors must meet the requirements of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.[1]
Bullock v. Carter
- See also: Bullock v. Carter
Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1972, Bullock v. Carter held that the Texas primary filing fee system, which required the payment of fees as high as $8,900, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The court found that, under this system, "many potential office seekers lacking both personal wealth and affluent backers are, in every practical sense, precluded from seeking the nomination of their chosen party, no matter how qualified they might be and no matter how broad or enthusiastic their popular support."[2][3]
Lubin v. Panish
- See also: Lubin v. Panish
Lubin v. Panish, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1974, held that, absent alternative means of ballot access, states cannot require indigent candidates to pay filing fees they cannot afford. To do so violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the rights of expression and association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.[4]
Storer v. Brown
- See also: Storer v. Brown
Storer v. Brown, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1974, upheld as constitutional a California law forbidding ballot access to independent candidates who had been registered with a qualified political party within one year prior to the immediately preceding primary election. The ruling also established a test to gauge the level of burden imposed by signature requirements: if the number of signatures required is divided by the number of eligible signers and the resulting percentage is greater than five percent, the requirement is likely unconstitutional.[5]
Illinois v. Socialist Workers Party
Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1979, the ruling in Illinois State Board of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party rendered unconstitutional an Illinois statutory requirement that new political parties and independent candidates for elections in political subdivisions (specifically, Chicago) gather more than the number of signatures required for elections for statewide office.[6]
Anderson v. Celebrezze
- See also: Anderson v. Celebrezze
Anderson v. Celebrezze, a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1983, held that Ohio's early filing deadline for independent presidential candidates violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, placing an unconstitutional burden on the voting and associational rights of supporters of independent presidential candidates.[7][8]
Norman v. Reed
- See also: Norman v. Reed
Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1992, Norman v. Reed held that it was unconstitutional for Illinois to require a new political party and its candidates to gather more than 25,000 signatures (the threshold for statewide office) to participate in elections for offices in political subdivisions. The ruling was, in part, a reaffirmation of the court's earlier decision in Illinois State Board of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party.[9]
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
- See also: U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton was a 1995 case in which the Supreme Court of the United States decided against U.S. Term Limits, ruling that states cannot impose qualifications for prospective members of Congress stricter than those specified in the Constitution. The decision invalidated congressional term limits provisions in 23 states.[10]
Explore election legislation with Ballotpedia
Try Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation TrackerBallotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker provides daily updates on legislative activity related to election policy in all 50 states.
Our election policy experts translate complex bill text into easy-to-understand summaries. And because it's from Ballotpedia, our legislation tracker is guaranteed to be neutral, unbiased, and nonpartisan.
Read Ballotpedia's State of Election Administration Legislation ReportsBallotpedia publishes regular analysis of election administration legislation, including three full reports per year, providing ongoing coverage of legislative activity affecting election policy in each state.
These reports deliver insights into partisan priorities, dive deep into notable trends, and highlight activity in key states.
Subscribe to The Ballot BulletinThe Ballot Bulletin is a weekly email that delivers the latest updates on election policy.
The newsletter tracks developments in election policy around the country, including legislative activity, big-picture trends, and recent news. Each email contains in-depth data from our Election Administration Legislation Tracker.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ Justia.com, "Williams v. Rhodes - 393 U.S. 23 (1968)," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "Bullock v. Carter - 405 U.S. 134 (1972)," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Frontline, "The Constitution and Campaign Finance: A Legal Movement for Change," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "Lubin v. Panish - 415 U.S. 709 (1974)," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "Storer v. Brown - 415 U.S. 724 (1974)," accessed April 1, 2014
- ↑ Justia.com, "Illinois State Bd. of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party - 440 U.S. 173 (1979)," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "Anderson v. Celebrezze - 460 U.S. 780 (1983)," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Oyez Project - U.S. Supreme Court Media - IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, "Anderson v. Celebrezze," accessed December 26, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "Norman v. Reed - 502 U.S. 279 (1992)," accessed December 27, 2013
- ↑ Justia.com, "U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton - 514 U.S. 779 (1994)," accessed December 27, 2013
