Several observers of California politics blame the state’s system of primary elections for increasing polarization in the state. In 1996, voters passed Proposition 198 to allow voters to participate in the primary of their choosing, even if they were registered under a different party. Discuss the pros and cons of such a system. Why did the U.S. Supreme Court strike down the system?

The system of primary elections in which voters can choose which primary to vote in regardless of their party affiliation is known as a "blanket primary" or "open primary." Here are some of the pros and cons of such a system:

Pros: 1. **Increased Voter Freedom:** Voters have more freedom to choose a candidate who aligns with their views, even if that candidate is not in their registered party. 2. **Moderation of Candidates:** Candidates may need to appeal to a broader audience to win, potentially leading to more moderate political positions. 3. **Reduced Partisanship:** By allowing cross-party voting, it could encourage a decrease in extreme partisanship. 4. **Engagement of Independent Voters:** Independent or unaffiliated voters can participate without having to register with a party.

Cons: 1. **Potential for Gaming the System:** Members of one party could strategically vote in the other party's primary to choose the weaker candidate to increase their own party's chances in the general election. 2. **Dilution of Party Identity:** It may weaken the ability of a party to put forward a candidate that truly represents their core values, as candidates cater to a broader electorate. 3. **Confusion among Voters:** This system can be confusing for voters used to a more traditional primary system. 4. **Possible Exclusion of Minority Parties:** Smaller parties may struggle to advance their candidates if they lack the numbers to compete in a cross-party primary.

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down California's blanket primary system in 2000 in the case of California Democratic Party v. Jones. The court held that the blanket primary violated political parties’ First Amendment right of association. The primary reason was that political parties have a right to choose their own nominees for the general election without interference from those who are not affiliated with the party. The court ruled that the blanket primary was too broad an infringement on that right because it allowed non-party members to influence the nomination process, which is an internal party affair.