Libertarians Vow Court Fight After Iowa Ballot Rulings

Two Libertarian candidates have been removed from Iowa’s November ballot following rulings by the State Objection Panel, while a third candidate survived a challenge and will remain in the race.

The panel voted June 15 to remove Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Nicholas Gluba and running mate Jules Cutler, as well as Libertarian 3rd Congressional District candidate Marco Battaglia. Both campaigns say they plan to appeal the decisions in court.

The rulings could have significant implications for several closely watched Iowa races this fall, where Libertarian candidates could draw votes away from Republican and Democratic candidates.

Governor’s Race

The panel ruled unanimously that Gluba and Cutler did not qualify for the ballot because Cutler failed to submit a required affidavit of candidacy by the filing deadline.

Cutler disputed that finding, arguing that she attempted to submit the affidavit and was incorrectly told by an employee in the Secretary of State’s office that it was unnecessary.

Gluba’s campaign submitted more than 8,000 petition signatures—well above the 3,500 required to qualify for the ballot—but the panel concluded the missing affidavit was disqualifying.

If the ruling stands, Democrat Rob Sand and Republican Zach Lahn would be the only candidates on Iowa’s gubernatorial ballot.

3rd Congressional District

The panel also voted 2-1 to remove Libertarian candidate Marco Battaglia from the ballot in Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District.

The dispute centered on Battaglia’s use of the name “Marco Battaglia” rather than his legal name, Mark T. Andersen, on filing documents. Supporters argued that Battaglia has previously appeared on Iowa ballots under the name Marco Battaglia and is widely known by that name.

The panel ultimately sided with challengers who argued Iowa law requires candidates to run under their legal names.

If the ruling stands, the race will feature Republican U.S. Rep. Zach Nunn and Democratic State Sen. Sarah Trone Garriott as the only candidates on the ballot.

Stewart Remains on Ballot

The panel unanimously dismissed a challenge against Libertarian congressional candidate Rick Stewart in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District.

Stewart had been challenged because some filing documents identified him as Richard Stewart while others used the name Rick Stewart, but the panel found that discrepancy was not sufficient grounds for removal.

Stewart will remain on the ballot alongside Republican Joe Mitchell, Democrat Lindsay James, and independent candidate Dave Bushaw.

Political Stakes

The ballot challenges come as Republicans seek to maintain control of the governor’s office and Iowa’s congressional delegation in what are expected to be highly competitive races.

Political analysts currently rate both the governor’s race and Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District as toss-ups.

Because Libertarian candidates often attract voters who might otherwise support Republican candidates, their presence—or absence—could affect the outcome in close races.

Libertarian Party of Iowa Chair Stephanie Berlin sharply criticized the challenges and vowed the party would continue fighting the rulings.

“We are not the Republican JV team,” Berlin said following the hearing. “We are not backing down.”

The outcome may now be decided in court, where Gluba, Cutler, and Battaglia are expected to appeal their removals from the ballot.

For now, however, Iowa’s November ballot has become a little less crowded, and potentially a lot more consequential.

Our Take

Election laws should not be weaponized to remove candidates from the ballot over harmless technicalities. But neither should they be ignored when they involve fundamental filing requirements.

That distinction matters.

We have previously criticized ballot challenges based on minor errors, typographical differences, or paperwork discrepancies that do not create meaningful confusion for voters. Democracy is generally better served when voters, not lawyers, decide elections.

However, the challenges involving Nicholas Gluba’s gubernatorial ticket and Marco Battaglia’s congressional candidacy appear to be different.

In Gluba’s case, the issue was not a spelling error or a misplaced initial. The challenge centered on whether a required affidavit of candidacy was submitted before the deadline. If the affidavit was never filed, that is a substantive requirement, not a technicality.

Cutler argues she attempted to submit the document and was told it was unnecessary. That may or may not be true. But anyone seeking public office bears ultimate responsibility for ensuring that required documents are properly filed. Candidates routinely verify filings, obtain confirmations, and document submissions because election deadlines are among the most unforgiving rules in government.

The Battaglia case raises a different concern. Battaglia’s supporters argued that he should be allowed to run under the name “Marco Battaglia” because he has done so in previous elections. That may explain why voters recognize the name, but it does not answer the underlying question.

If Iowa law requires candidates to file under their legal names, then previous enforcement decisions do not automatically justify future exceptions. The purpose of election law is to create consistent standards that apply equally to everyone. A candidate’s popularity, history, or familiarity with voters should not determine whether those standards are enforced.

Reasonable people can disagree about where to draw the line between protecting ballot access and enforcing election rules. But if deadlines, affidavits, and legal identities are not considered important enough to enforce, it becomes difficult to explain why those requirements exist in the first place.

The larger concern for Iowa voters should not be whether these candidates remain on the ballot. It should be whether election laws are applied consistently, transparently, and fairly, regardless of which party or candidate benefits from the outcome.

That standard should apply to Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, no-party candidates, and everyone else.