In a Libertarian victory, a Denver, Colo.-based federal appellate court ruled April 6 that Oklahoma's election law is unconstitutional -- that the state cannot continue its primary system, which prohibits a political party from allowing registered voters with other parties to vote in its primary elections.

The Libertarian Party in Oklahoma challenged the law in a lawsuit that was first heard in state court about two years ago, Oklahoma LP chair Steve Galpin said. The federal court ruling reverses the decision of a judge in Oklahoma City, who in 2003 refused to grant an injunction and throw out the primary law.

Oklahoma election officials may appeal the federal court's decision instead of changing state law. But according to the ruling, the LP and other parties should now be allowed to invite all registered voters in the state to vote in the party primaries, regardless of affiliation.

"The question is, does the party determine who votes in our primary, or does the state make that determination?" Galpin said. "Our contention is that it should be our decision, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with us -- giving a 3-0 ruling that the law is unconstitutional."

The judges determined that the election laws "impermissibly violate" the LP's constitutional right "to freedom of political association."

The court's ruling does not require each party to allow other parties' registered voters to vote across party lines: The Democrats won't necessarily allow Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary.

But the parties now have an option they didn't have before.

"Oklahoma law said the party could allow Independents only to vote in our primary," Galpin said, "and we let them. But the Democrats and Republicans have never allowed Independents to vote in their primaries. They've both said they don't want to allow that, that they want only their party members to select their candidates in the primary."

Oklahoma Libertarians, however, want to let people decide for themselves whether they want to vote Libertarian -- no matter what party they belong to.

And they've done it for one reason: "to allow more freedom in the voting process," Galpin said.

Freedom in the voting process is one thing Oklahoma does not have. At least, not where third parties are concerned.

The LP is now in a petition drive, trying to get enough signatures on a petition to get on the ballot in this fall's elections. By state law, the LP "or any other party that isn't currently classified as a major party" must get signatures from 5 percent of the people who voted in the previous general election, before they are granted access to the ballot, Galpin said.

"And if we get on the ballot and we don't get 10 percent of the vote in the presidential election, we'll lose that ballot access again," he added. "Then in 2006, whoever our nominee is for governor would have to get 10 percent of the vote or, again, we'd lose that status.

"We need a change in the law. But it's hard to even get someone to introduce a ballot access law, much less get it through the legislature. This law has been in effect since 1972, and the major parties certainly don't want to change it now."

It will be very difficult for the LP to get enough signatures to get on the ballot this fall.

"To tell you the truth, it's probably not going to happen," Galpin said. "We need about 60,000 valid signatures. That means we need to collect at least 75,000 or 80,000 signatures, or more, to make sure we get enough good ones.

"I don't think we're going to have the money, the time or the support to get that many signatures."

Even if they don't get enough signatures, he said, the Oklahoma LP's leaders will submit those they do get, to let the state power structure know they are serious.

But while ballot access in the state is miserable -- one of the worst in the nation, Galpin said -- and the state's primarily Democrat legislature is uncooperative in changing that election law, the federal court's ruling against a portion of the law is encouraging for the Oklahoma LP.

"This is a good victory for the First Amendment," said James Linger, an attorney for the party.