Richie Diesterheft / Wikimedia Commons
Why It Matters
Wyoming’s closed primary system — and the rules that decide who can vote in party elections — are now before the state’s highest court. The outcome could reshape how Wyoming residents participate in primary elections and has implications for similar election integrity debates unfolding across the Mountain West.
What Happened
The Wyoming Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday on whether the state’s ban on crossover voting violates the Wyoming Constitution. The case has wound through the courts since August 2024, when plaintiffs first filed suit challenging what is sometimes called the “sore loser law.” The complaint was later expanded in 2025 to include broader challenges to closed primaries and party affiliation restrictions.
A Laramie County District Court judge upheld the laws in November, finding them constitutional. Plaintiffs then narrowed their complaint and appealed in March, focusing specifically on the crossover-voting ban. The case is now before the Wyoming Supreme Court, with Justice Bridget Hill recused following the appeal filing and Judge Joshua C. Eames sitting in her place.
Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray is named as the defendant in his official capacity. Gray made clear where he stands: “I have defended and will continue to defend Wyoming’s primary system and our ban on crossover voting amid these radical Left attacks in court.”
The Legal Arguments
Plaintiffs argue the crossover ban runs afoul of two provisions in the Wyoming Constitution — one guaranteeing the “untrammeled exercise of the right of suffrage” and another protecting “equal political rights.” Attorney William Schwartz, arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs, contended the restriction serves no legitimate government interest: “It advances no public purpose. It solves no problem.”
Defenders of the law point to Wyoming Constitution Article 6, Section 13, which directs the legislature to “secure the purity of elections” — a provision they argue gives lawmakers broad authority to regulate primary participation and prevent party-raiding by voters registered to another party.
The 2023 legislature tightened the rules by extending the party affiliation deadline to 96 days before the primary, aligning registration changes with the candidate filing window. Before that change, Wyoming operated under a partially open primary system for decades, allowing voters more flexibility to cross party lines.
Real Voters, Real Impact
The case is not abstract. Two named plaintiffs describe being blocked from supporting family members in 2024 primary contests. Joshua Malcom was unable to cast a vote for his brother Matthew in the House District 61 primary. Christina Kitchen was similarly prevented from voting for her brother-in-law Jim Rooks in the Teton County Commission race. Their experiences became the human backdrop to a constitutional question about how far the state can go in restricting voter choice during primaries.
Jim Roscoe, who served as the lone independent lawmaker in the Wyoming House, representing District 22, has also been part of the broader legal conversation around the restrictions’ effect on voters unaffiliated with major parties.
By the Numbers
- August 2024: Original lawsuit filed
- 2025: Complaint expanded to include closed-primary and party affiliation challenges
- November 2025: District court ruled in favor of the state
- March 2026: Plaintiffs appealed to Wyoming Supreme Court
- 96 days: Current deadline before a primary for voters to change party affiliation
Zoom Out
Wyoming’s case is part of a broader national conversation about who controls primary elections and how states regulate ballot access. Similar legal and legislative fights over primary rules, voter rolls, and election procedures are playing out in states across the region. Federal scrutiny of voter rolls and state voter-data policies has added another layer to the debate, with questions about mail ballot rules and voter roll access also working their way through the courts. Wyoming’s ruling could offer a legal reference point for other Mountain West states facing parallel challenges to their primary structures, much like redistricting and voting rights cases are reshaping electoral maps elsewhere, including a redistricting challenge in Washington State now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
What’s Next
The Wyoming Supreme Court will deliberate following Wednesday’s arguments, though no timeline for a ruling has been set publicly. If the court strikes down the crossover-voting ban, Wyoming could be forced to revisit its primary structure ahead of future election cycles. If it upholds the law, the state’s closed-primary rules remain firmly in place — at least until another legal challenge emerges.
About the Author
