Quick read
- A lawsuit challenges Maryland’s closed primary system, filed by independent voters.
- Plaintiffs argue exclusion violates the Maryland Constitution and voting rights.
- The case highlights taxpayer-funded elections that bar unaffiliated voters.
- Similar efforts for open primaries are gaining momentum nationwide.
What are closed primaries, and why are they controversial
Closed primaries are election systems that restrict participation to voters registered with specific political parties. In Maryland, this means only Democrats and Republicans can vote in their respective primaries, which are often pivotal in determining final election outcomes. According to IVN, this system leaves nearly 1 million unaffiliated voters in Maryland without a voice in taxpayer-funded elections, sparking growing frustration.
The controversy stems from the fact that primary elections are publicly funded, yet exclude a significant portion of voters. Critics argue that this practice not only undermines democratic principles but also constitutes “taxation without representation.” Independent voters, who are the fastest-growing voter group nationwide, are increasingly pushing for reforms to include all eligible voters in the electoral process.
What is the basis of the lawsuit in Maryland?
The lawsuit, filed by the Open Primaries Education Fund and five unaffiliated voters, asserts that Maryland’s closed primary system violates multiple provisions of the state constitution. As reported by IVN, the plaintiffs argue that Article 1, Section 1 of the Maryland Constitution guarantees all registered voters the right to participate in “all elections held in this State.” Additionally, they cite the Free Elections Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Maryland Declaration of Rights to claim that the system discriminates against independent voters.
Former Maryland Lt. Governor Boyd K. Rutherford, serving as legal counsel for the plaintiffs, emphasized that the goal is not to force political parties to include independents in their primaries but to stop using taxpayer dollars to fund an exclusionary process. This distinction is crucial, as it frames the lawsuit as a question of suffrage and public accountability rather than party politics.
How do closed primaries impact Maryland voters?
In Maryland, many general elections are uncompetitive, meaning the primary often determines the ultimate winner. For independent voters, being excluded from this critical stage effectively disenfranchises them. One of the plaintiffs, Dona Sauerburger, expressed frustration, stating, “I want my voice to be heard,” as quoted by IVN. She noted that candidates often dismiss the concerns of unaffiliated voters, knowing they cannot participate in primaries.
Financial considerations also play a role. According to a 2024 report cited by IVN, the cost of running a single primary election in Prince George’s County can reach $2 million. Critics argue that it is unjust to spend public funds on elections that exclude a large segment of taxpayers. This argument has gained traction as more states and cities adopt open primary systems to address similar concerns.
What reforms are being proposed?
The plaintiffs and their supporters are advocating for the adoption of open primaries, which allow all registered voters to participate, regardless of party affiliation. As noted by IVN, 37 states have implemented some form of open primaries, with recent reforms in Alaska, Colorado, Maine, and New Mexico. These changes have been lauded for increasing voter participation and fostering more competitive elections.
In New Mexico, for example, bipartisan legislation passed in 2025 will open primaries to over 330,000 independent voters starting in 2026. Advocates believe that Maryland could follow suit, setting a precedent for other states with similar closed systems. Jeremy Gruber, senior vice president of the Open Primaries Education Fund, emphasized that “Maryland’s Constitution promises every voter the right to participate in elections. That promise must be upheld.”
What are the broader implications of this lawsuit
The Maryland lawsuit is part of a growing national movement challenging closed primaries. Similar legal efforts have been launched in states like New Jersey and California, where independent voter organizations are pushing for more inclusive electoral systems. The outcome of these cases could have far-reaching implications for election reform across the United States.
As the fastest-growing voter demographic, independents are demanding a greater say in the political process. With primary elections increasingly determining final outcomes, their exclusion raises fundamental questions about fairness and representation. According to IVN, the Maryland case could set a critical precedent, influencing how other states address the issue of closed primaries.
As debates over election reform continue, the Maryland lawsuit underscores the need to balance party interests with the democratic rights of all voters. The outcome will likely shape the future of primary elections in the state and beyond.