The Maryland Court of Appeals has ruled against Moisette I. Sweat, an unaffiliated candidate seeking to run for County Executive in Prince George’s County. The court's decision, issued on September 9, 2026, upheld the ruling of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, which found that Sweat did not provide sufficient evidence to challenge the Board of Elections' rejection of her nomination signatures. This ruling could significantly affect her ability to appear on the ballot in the upcoming general election.
The case, Sweat v. Prince George’s County Board of Elections (Docket No. 25pc/26), centers on the requirements for candidates to access the ballot in Maryland. Under state law, candidates can be nominated in three ways: by a political party, by petition, or as a write-in candidate. Candidates seeking nomination by petition must gather a certain number of valid signatures from registered voters. In Sweat’s case, she needed at least 6,531 valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.
Sweat filed her certificate of candidacy with the Board of Elections on June 8, 2026, and submitted a petition containing 6,743 signatures on August 3, 2026. However, the Board reviewed the signatures and determined that 1,316 were invalid, leaving her short of the required number. This prompted Sweat to file a complaint in the Circuit Court, seeking a ruling that would allow her to appear on the ballot.
The Circuit Court held a bench trial on September 3, 2026, where Sweat argued that the Board had improperly rejected valid signatures. However, the court found insufficient evidence to support her claims. The court ruled, “there is insufficient evidence for the court to determine whether the County Board rejected valid signatures and thereby caused Ms. Sweat to fail to meet the one percent threshold.” Consequently, the court denied her request for relief.
Following this decision, Sweat appealed directly to the Maryland Court of Appeals. The court expedited the appeal process, requiring both parties to submit briefs by September 8, 2026, and held oral arguments on September 9, 2026. The court ultimately affirmed the Circuit Court's ruling, stating that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in its findings.
The court ruled, “the record contains insufficient evidence to establish that Ms. Sweat qualified for the November 2026 general election ballot.”
Chief Justice Matthew J. Fader, along with other justices, issued the ruling. The court ordered that costs be paid by Sweat, signifying that she is responsible for the legal expenses incurred during the case.
This ruling has significant implications for candidates in Maryland, particularly those seeking to run as unaffiliated candidates. It reinforces the importance of gathering valid signatures and adhering to the state's election laws. The decision may also serve as a precedent for future cases involving challenges to signature validity and the process of candidate nominations.
Going forward, this ruling means that Sweat will not be able to appear on the ballot for the November 2026 general election unless she can successfully challenge the ruling in a higher court. However, details about any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. This case highlights the challenges faced by candidates in meeting the legal requirements to run for office, particularly in a political landscape that can be complex and competitive.
As of now, there are no related cases pending that could affect this ruling. However, the outcome of this case may prompt discussions about the nomination process and the criteria for candidates in Maryland.