Airey v. Feliciano

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of a motion for a new primary because the governing statute does not authorize a new primary when the scheduled primary was canceled and no slate qualified for the ballot. It also rejected the claim that denying a new primary violated voters' fundamental rights, reasoning that the candidates' failure to qualify, rather than state action, caused the absence of an election. The court further upheld the application of the imputed knowledge doctrine and declined to overrule or narrow it.