YOUNGSTOWN — While a federal judge quickly rejected Appeals Court Judge Mark A. Hanni’s motion to intervene in a case seeking to overturn a law requiring party affiliation on the ballot for upper-court judicial candidates, his declaration in opposition to the lawsuit is part of the court record.

Included as part of Thursday’s summary judgment filing by state officials, Hanni’s one-page declaration states he is a 7th District Court of Appeals judge, he is running in Tuesday’s Republican primary, and being identified as a Republican is “important to me. A candidate’s political identity is information voters routinely consider. I sought the nomination of the Republican Party because I share the values of that party and I want voters to know that I share the values of the Republican Party. Removing my party designation from the ballot reduces the information that voters will have about me. Further, removing my party designation from the ballot will not protect speech, it reduces it.”

Hanni said the declaration allowed him to present his “perspective directly to the court, which was the primary purpose behind my request to intervene. I believe that had I not sought intervention the opportunity to formally present my views through the declaration process likely would not have occurred.”

Hanni said if he decides to file an amicus brief – also called a friend of the court filing – he will inform the public.

Judge Benita Y. Pearson on Monday denied Hanni’s motion filed three days prior, to intervene saying it was “untimely.”

Pearson wrote: “The motion was filed as this case reaches the final stages of litigation. Although Judge Hanni reviewed the court’s docket in the case, he erroneously concluded that no dispositive motion schedule had been set. In fact, the court’s Aug. 13 case management conference order, which is clearly posted on the docket, explicitly required discovery to close on Feb. 26 and dispositive motions to be filed by April 30.”

Pearson added: “Not only does his motion come six days before the parties must file their motion for summary judgment, and almost two months after discovery closed, but Judge Hanni acknowledges that he was aware of this case three months ago. Moreover, the motion acknowledges that this case has been pending before the court since November 2023 and in discovery since August 2024. Permitting intervention at this late stage would cause undue delay and would prejudice the existing parties, who would need to prepare for, consider and respond to briefings by an intervening party that has, to this point, not participated in any discovery, negotiations or proceedings.”

Hanni was the only judge to submit a declaration on behalf of the state in the case filed by Ohio Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, in opposition to a 2021 state law that requires party affiliation for candidates running for appeals court judge and Ohio Supreme Court justice seats on the general election ballot.

A sitting judge, Hanni is running for a different seat on the appeals court in Tuesday’s GOP primary against David “Chip” Comstock Jr.

In her ruling, Pearson wrote that Hanni’s “intervention appears to seek the opportunity to ‘express his position,’ rather than preserve his rights, regarding the party designation requirements for judicial candidates on Ohio ballots. To the extent this factor weighs in favor of intervention, it is outweighed by the remaining factors. The motion is denied as untimely.”