In a twist to Nebraska’s Democratic Senate primary saga, William Forbes, who secured just over 10% of the primary vote, is pressing for the Nebraska Democratic Party to nominate a new candidate for the upcoming general election after the initial winner, Cindy Burbank, stepped down.
Forbes, an anti-abortion pastor, has declared his willingness to be considered as the replacement candidate. His campaign has stirred controversy with accusations from Democrats suggesting he is a “plant” candidate meant to benefit incumbent U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts. Meanwhile, Burbank had openly declared her plan to withdraw post-primary to funnel support toward independent candidate Dan Osborn, a plan she executed last month.
The courtroom became the stage for this unfolding drama on Monday, as Forbes sought a temporary injunction to compel the party to replace Burbank. Lancaster County District Court Judge Susan Strong heard the arguments and stated she would reach a decision “as soon as I can.”
The debate hinges on two Nebraska statutes. One statute implies that a candidate’s withdrawal creates a vacancy “which may be filled,” while another stipulates that the “vacancy shall be filled by the majority vote of the proper committee of the same political party.”
The Nebraska Democratic Party interprets these laws as a voluntary two-step process: they may choose to fill the vacancy, and if they do, they must abide by the stipulated procedure. Forbes’ legal team contends that filling the vacancy is, in fact, obligatory.
Daniel Gutman, representing the Democratic Party, argued against the injunction, citing procedural issues. He claimed Forbes lacks standing to bring the lawsuit, as he doesn’t suffer any “concrete injury” from the party’s decision not to replace Burbank. “Forbes talks very generally about the right to vote, but that generalized right does not at all confer standing on him to do something totally different – which is to force a political party to engage in conduct that it doesn’t intend to do against its will,” Gutman stated.
This case marks just another chapter in an already litigious primary characterized by strategic withdrawals and allegations of political maneuvering. As the legal battle continues, the Nebraska Democratic Party’s next steps remain uncertain.
