The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that Nader should be on the ballot. Its decision basically ignores the factual findings by the trial court — findings that I thought were dispositive — on the theory that the statute at issue is vague as to what constitutes a “national party” and in particular failed to give potential candidates the guidance they were entitled to as to their ballot entitlement.
In light of this vagueness, and Florida's strong policy in favor of ballot access, the court said it was unwilling to conclude that the legislative intent was to have candidates like him thrown him off the ballot. This is a plausible argument, but I don't think it imposes the excessive legislative clear statement requirement that the court found. Even if it's not exactly clear where the line is, there are some things that clearly don't qualify as a “national party” and today's Reform Party is I think one them. But what I think doesn't matter, and that's that.