Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party
| Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party | |
|---|---|
| Argued December 4, 1996 Decided April 28, 1997 | |
| Full case name | Timmons, Acting Director, Ramsey County Department of Property Records and Revenue, et al. v. Twin Cities Area New Party |
| Docket no. | 95-1608 |
| Citations | 520 U.S. 351 (more) 117 S.Ct. 1364 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Holding | |
| States may prohibit candidates from being listed on the ballot as the candidate of more than one party. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Breyer |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Ginsburg; Souter (Parts I and II) |
| Dissent | Souter |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV | |
Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that state governments may prohibit candidates from being listed on the ballot for more than one party. In deciding that candidates do not have a First Amendment freedom of association to represent multiple parties, this case limited the spread of electoral fusion in the United States.