We do not interpret our previous decisions or
Anderson as mandating a holding that a filing deadline for independent candidates which is in line with the deadlines of approximately two-thirds of the states,
see Anderson, 460 U.S. at 795 n. 20, 103 S.Ct. at 1573 n. 20, imposes a substantial burden on voting and associational rights merely because it fell a few weeks before one major party's convention one year.
Cf. Perry v. Grant, 775 F.Supp. 821, 829 (M.D.Pa.1991) (noting no constitutional entitlement to gather signatures for nominating papers after nomination of party candidates). There is no evidence in the record as to exactly when the major parties hold their conventions, although they traditionally occur during the summer months.
See Anderson, 460 U.S. at 800, 103 S.Ct. at 1576. The deadlines in the previous Tenth Circuit cases and
Anderson undoubtedly fell before the major parties would hold their conventions. For all we know, it was an anomaly in the present case that independents had to file before a major party convention in 1992. In any event,
Rainbow Coalition made it clear that a filing deadline, at least for nonpresidential candidates, does not impose an unconstitutional burden merely because it falls before the major party conventions.