United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-1074
                         ___________________________

           Independence-Alliance Party of Minnesota; Hugh McTavish

                                     Plaintiffs - Appellants

                                         v.

  Steve Simon, in his official capacity as the Minnesota secretary of state, or his
                                     successor

                                     Defendant - Appellee
                                  ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                          for the District of Minnesota
                                 ____________

                           Submitted: October 17, 2023
                            Filed: December 1, 2023
                                 ____________

Before GRUENDER, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

GRUENDER, Circuit Judge.

      The Independence-Alliance Party of Minnesota (“Party”) appeals the
dismissal of its complaint challenging the lawfulness of a requirement that voters
swear an oath before signing a minor-party nominating petition. See Minn. Stat.
§ 204B.07, subd. 4. We affirm.
                                          I.

       In Minnesota, the process for nominating major-party candidates to appear on
the general election ballot differs from the process for minor-party candidates.
Major-party candidates are nominated by primary election, while minor-party
candidates can appear on the general election ballot if they successfully submit a
nominating petition. See Minn. Stat. §§ 204B.03, 204B.07, 204B.08. The
nominating-petition process requires prospective minor-party candidates to collect
signatures from eligible voters. See id. § 204B.08. And in order to sign, each eligible
voter is required to swear an oath. See id. § 204B.07, subd. 1, 4. The required oath
reads:

      I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I know the contents and purpose of
      this petition, that I do not intend to vote at the primary election for the
      office for which this nominating petition is made, and that I signed this
      petition of my own free will.

Id. § 204B.07, subd. 4. Those who falsely swear the oath are guilty of perjury,
punishable by up to five years in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both. Id. § 204B.07,
subd. 6; see also id. § 609.48.

       The Independence-Alliance Party of Minnesota is a minor political party that
regularly fields candidates for partisan office in Minnesota’s general elections. The
Party has successfully used the nominating-petition procedure in the past. To ensure
its nominating petitions comply with Minnesota law, the Party recruits and trains
volunteers to solicit signatures and answer questions about the oath requirement.
The Party alleges that potential signatories often ask volunteers about the oath; that
potential signatories are sometimes reluctant or even unwilling to sign a nominating
petition because of the oath requirement; and that there appears to be concern by
some potential signatories that signing the oath means giving up the right to vote in
the primary election.

      The Party sued the Minnesota Secretary of State, alleging that the oath
requirement violates the First Amendment because it burdens the expressive


                                         -2-
associational rights of minor political parties, their members, and their candidates by
deterring voters from signing nominating petitions. Applying the Anderson-Burdick
framework, the district court 1 declined to apply strict scrutiny because the Party
plausibly alleged that “at most” the oath requirement imposed an insubstantial
burden on expressive association. The court then concluded that important election
interests justified that insubstantial burden. This appea