Maryland’s Closed Primaries Challenge: A Win for Independent Voters?

Maryland’s growing bloc of unaffiliated voters—almost 1 million strong, around 22% of all registered voters—has sparked a landmark lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of closed primaries in the state.

What’s the Lawsuit About?

Filed in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court by five independent voters and led by former Republican Lt. Gov. Boyd Rutherford, the lawsuit argues that taxpayer-funded primary elections from which unaffiliated voters are excluded violate the state constitution—specifically the Free Elections Clause and the declaration that “all citizens … shall be entitled to vote at every election”.

These primaries are administered and financed by the state, yet only Democrats and Republicans can participate, blocking nearly a quarter of the electorate. As Rutherford puts it: “The state should not be paying for it because it is unconstitutional”.

Who’s Leading the Charge?

• Attorney Boyd Rutherford, lead counsel representing the plaintiffs, emphasizes this as a suffrage issue, not a partisan play: the suit doesn’t force parties to open their primaries, only prevents public funding of exclusionary elections.

• Open Primaries Education Fund, a national nonprofit, backs the case, citing Maryland’s robust unaffiliated voter growth and trends toward open primaries in other states like Alaska, Colorado, Maine, and New Mexico.

• The 5 plaintiffs: Dona Sauerburger and Robert Sartwell in Anne Arundel County, Serena Bryson in Prince George’s County, Kimberle Fields in St. Mary’s County and Amber Ivey in Baltimore City.

Why It Matters

In heavily partisan areas—such as Baltimore, Montgomery, and Prince George’s Counties—the primary often is the decisive election. And yet, independent voters are legally shut out. With more than 950,000 voters disenfranchised from choosing nominees, critics argue that Maryland taxpayers are unfairly funding a system that excludes a significant segment of the electorate.

The Broader Context

This lawsuit follows a national trend—Virginia has long offered open primaries, Washington, D.C. recently joined via ballot initiative, and states like New Mexico are preparing to open theirs by 2026. Meanwhile, legal experts note that federal courts have historically upheld closed primaries—but Maryland’s constitution poses a unique angle by explicitly affirming voting rights in “all elections” .

What’s Next

The case asks the court to:

1. Declare funding closed primaries unconstitutional.

2. Block the state from holding or funding partisan primaries unless unaffiliated voters are included.

If successful, it could open the way for nearly a million unaffiliated Marylanders to vote in 2026 primaries—including the high-stakes gubernatorial matchup expected then.

Why It Matters to You

• Independent voters: a true seat at the table.

• Democracy-watchers: a test case of whether publicly funded elections must be inclusive by law.

• Every Marylander: a conversation about fairness, representation, and the meaning of “public election.”

  
  

We’ll be following this closely as the case progresses. Let us know your thoughts—will this reshape primary voting in Maryland for good?