[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/13/11

JBoppjr at aol.com JBoppjr at aol.com
Wed Jul 13 07:44:56 PDT 2011


Regarding the following post, we have confirmed  with the 8th Circuit that 
both rulings of the 3 judge panel  are vacated  and are subject of the en 
banc argument. We are seeking supplemental argument  today to address the 
ruling in the Virginia district court striking down the ban  on corporate 
contributions to candidates where we will argue that  Beaumont is not binding 
precedent on this point.   Jim  Bopp
 
 
_Eighth Circuit Grants  Rehearing En Banc in Swanson Case; Scope of En Banc 
Review Unclear_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20294)  
Posted on  _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20294)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
The Eighth Circuit just issued_  this order_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/swanson-enbanc-order.pdf)  in MCCL v. Swanson: 
Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc has been considered by the Court 
 and is granted. The opinion and judgment of this Court filed on May 16, 
2011,  are vacated. 
The en banc argument will be scheduled for Wednesday, September 21, 2011,  
in St. Louis, Missouri.
Swanson had two holdings: (1) the state ban on corporate  contributions to 
candidates remains constitutional even after Citizens  United and (2) the 
state’s rules for disclosure of certain political  activity are 
constitutional. 
MCCL (through their attorney Jim Bopp) sought review only on the disclosure 
 issue and not on the corporate contribution to candidate issue. See _this 
post_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18580) , with a link to the  petition. 
What is unclear from the Eighth Circuit’s en banc order is whether the full 
 Eighth Circuit sua sponte plans to review issue (1) as well. The order 
does make  it clear that the panel opinion is vacated and cannot be cited as 
precedent, on  point (1) or point (2). 
[Disclosure: I am one of the attorneys representing the City of San Diego  
where a _similar issue_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19601)  to issue (1) 
is  pending in a Ninth Circuit case brought by Jim Bopp; Bopp's request for  
rehearing en banc there is pending.]

 
 
In a message dated 7/13/2011 12:33:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:

 
_“6 fake Democrats  fall, setting stage for GOP recalls”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20314)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20314)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
More _news_ (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/125464393.html)  
from  Wisconsin. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20314&title=“6%20fake%20Democrats%20fall,%20setting%20stage%20for%20GOP%20recalls
”&description=) 


Posted in _recall elections_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=11)   | 
Comments Off 

 
_Janice Hahn Wins CA-36  Special Election under Top Two_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20312)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20312)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
I guess it was _not enough_ 
(http://rrcc.co.la.ca.us/elect/11070592/rr0592pa.html-ssi)   to tell McCain-Feingold to _suck it_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19210) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20312&title=Janice%20Hahn%20Wins%20CA-36%20Special%20Election%20under%20Top%20Two
&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) ,  
_primaries_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32)   | Comments Off 

 
_“Newly Released FEC  Documents Provide Insight Into Legal Issues in 
Clinton Audit”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20309)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20309)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
_BNA_ 
(http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=21292525&vname=mpebulallissues&fn=21292525&jd=a0c8j4f8v5&split=0) :  “Staff auditors 
and attorneys for the Federal Election Commission raised  questions about 
millions of dollars in contributions to Hillary Clinton’s 2008  presidential 
campaign, but the FEC commissioners unanimously dismissed the  staff concerns, 
according to a 2010 _memorandum_ 
(http://www.fec.gov/audits/Hillary_Clinton_for_President/OfficeofGeneralCounsel-CommissionDirective69Memoranda1175259.pd
f)  recently made public by the FEC.” 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20309&title=“
Newly%20Released%20FEC%20Documents%20Provide%20Insight%20Into%20Legal%20Issues%20in%20Clinton%20Audit”&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)   | 
Comments Off 

 
_“Still Other People’s  Money: Reconciling Citizens United with Abood and 
Beck”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20306)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20306)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
Jeremy Mallory has posted _this draft  _ 
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1879493) on SSRN (Cal Western Law Review).  Here is the 
abstract: 
Citizens United has already taken its place as a landmark decision of the  
2009 Term of the Roberts Court. Its story is not complete, however: while it 
 overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and rejected the  
equalization of voice in politics as a valid justification for constraints  on 
spending, it did not excise deeper concerns – both congressional and  judicial –
 about the corrupting misuse of “other people’s money,” in Louis  Brandeis’
s memorable phrasing. A line of cases regarding the use of union  dues for 
political purposes (primarily Communications Workers of America v.  Beck and 
Abood v. Detroit Board of Education) and the legislative findings  of the 
Tillman Act present a coherent description of political corruption  that 
Citizens United left standing, but never seriously reckoned with. Given  that 
these legislative and judicial convictions retain their vitality even  after 
Citizens United, the Court must modify the Citizens United regime to  
accommodate this view of corruption. Permitting shareholders to opt their  
investments out of political use would be a sufficient protection for their  right 
not to have their money used for political speech with which they  disagree 
while protecting the corporation’s right to political speech  articulated in 
Citizens United. 
This article draws out the difficulty recognized in the union-dues cases  – 
having one’s money used for political speech with which one disagrees –  
and applies it to the new Citizens United world. Because Citizens United  
presented a legal rule with little guidance as to implementation, this  article 
opens a much-needed discourse on how to work with the new world that  has 
taken hold in campaign finance.
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20306&title=“Still%20Other%20People’
s%20Money:%20Reconciling%20Citizens%20United%20with%20Abood%20and%20Beck”&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)   | 
Comments Off 

 
_“Ruling on bias has  Supreme Court judges bickering again”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20303)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20303)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
_Milwaukee  Journal-Sentinel_ 
(http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/125432173.html) : 
State Supreme Court justices can’t kick each other off cases for alleged  
bias, the court ruled Tuesday in a bitterly divided decision along  
now-familiar 4-3 lines. 
_The decision_ 
(http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=67832)  prompted a fresh round of tough words for one  
another, with the dissenters saying Justice Patience Roggensack had forsaken  a “
bedrock principle of law” to supply the deciding vote in the matter. They  
said Roggensack should not have participated in deciding whether she was  
ethically constrained from staying on the case.
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20303&title=“
Ruling%20on%20bias%20has%20Supreme%20Court%20judges%20bickering%20again”&description=) 


Posted in _conflict of interest  laws_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20) 
, _judicial elections_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19)   | Comments 
Off 

 
_California Court of  Appeal Decides Legislator Residency Case; Notes “Off 
Pink” Bedding in  Legislator’s Purported Residence_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20299)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20299)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
See _here_ (http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0711/B232709) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20299&title=California%20Court%20of%20Appeal%20Decides%20Legislator%20Residency%2
0Case;%20Notes%20“Off%20Pink”%20Bedding%20in%20Legislator’
s%20Purported%20Residence&description=) 


Posted in _residency_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=38)   | Comments Off 

 
_Eighth Circuit Grants  Rehearing En Banc in Swanson Case; Scope of En Banc 
Review Unclear_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20294)   
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20294)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
The Eighth Circuit just issued_  this order_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/swanson-enbanc-order.pdf)  in MCCL v. Swanson: 
Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc has been considered by the  
Court and is granted. The opinion and judgment of this Court filed on May  16, 
2011, are vacated. 
The en banc argument will be scheduled for Wednesday, September 21, 2011,  
in St. Louis, Missouri.
Swanson had two holdings: (1) the state ban on corporate  contributions to 
candidates remains constitutional even after Citizens  United and (2) the 
state’s rules for disclosure of certain political  activity are 
constitutional. 
MCCL (through their attorney Jim Bopp) sought review only on the disclosure 
 issue and not on the corporate contribution to candidate issue.   See 
_this post_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=18580) , with a link to the  
petition. 
What is unclear from the Eighth Circuit’s en banc order is whether the full 
 Eighth Circuit sua sponte plans to review issue (1) as well.  The order  
does make it clear that the panel opinion is vacated and cannot be cited as  
precedent, on point (1) or point (2). 
[Disclosure: I am one of the attorneys representing the City of San Diego  
where a _similar issue_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19601)  to issue (1) 
is  pending in a Ninth Circuit case brought by Jim Bopp; Bopp's request for  
rehearing en banc there is pending.] 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20294&title=Eighth%20Circuit%20Grants%20Rehearing%20En%20Banc%20in%20<i>Swanson</
i>%20Case;%20Scope%20of%20En%20Banc%20Review%20Unclear&description=) 


Posted in _Uncategorized_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1)   | Comments 
Off 

 
_“Spider-Man, Stephen  Colbert and the Shareholder Protection Act”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20291)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20291)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy and Lisa Gilbert have written _this  post_ 
(http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/170947-spider-man-stephen-colbert-and
-campaign-finance)  on “The Hill’s Congress Blog.” 
 
 (http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20291&title=“
Spider-Man,%20Stephen%20Colbert%20and%20the%20Shareholder%20Protection%20Act”&description=) 


Posted in _Uncategorized_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1)   | Comments 
Off 

 
_“Change in State  Supreme Court Elections: Is Voting Becoming More 
Partisan?”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20286)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20286)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
Herbert Kritzer has posted_ this  draft_ 
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1879952)  on SSRN.  Here is the abstract; 
Judicial elections, particularly elections to state supreme courts, have  
generated substantial commentary over the last decade. Observers have  
asserted that elections have become more hotly contested, nastier, more  
expensive, and more divisive. This paper focuses on the question of whether  
elections are increasingly partisan. Using a data set of all statewide  partisan and 
nonpartisan elections since 1946 plus a subset of retention  elections from 
that same period, patterns of partisanship in voting are  examined. The 
results of the analysis show that in some circumstances voting  patterns in 
state supreme court elections have become more partisan.  Elections that are 
explicitly partisan have not changed. The change has  occurred in a subset of 
the states employing nonpartisan elections. The  states that have 
experienced this change are those where the state supreme  court has been called upon 
to decide questions where the issues align with  partisan divisions (death 
penalty, same-sex marriage, abortion, property  rights, tort reform). Where 
strong partisan patterns have occurred in  retention elections these patterns 
typically arise in the wake of a  controversial decision dealing with one 
of the partisan-aligned issues. The  paper concludes by observing that if 
courts deal with issues that activate  partisan divisions, it is not surprising 
that voters, given the opportunity,  will respond in a way that reflects 
those same partisan divisions.  Importantly, the retention elections 
associated with the so-called “merit”  system do not escape this pattern when the 
justices of the courts who must  stand for retention decide divisive issues.
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20286&title=“
Change%20in%20State%20Supreme%20Court%20Elections:%20Is%20Voting%20Becoming%20More%20Partisan?”&description=) 


Posted in _judicial elections_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19)   | 
Comments Off 

 
_Election Day Dirty  Tricks_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20284)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20284)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
See _here_ 
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/12/993855/-Out-of-state-robocalls-telling-Wisconsin-Dems-not-to-vote-in-todays-recallprimaries?detail=
hide&via=blog_1)   and _here_ 
(http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0711/CA36_Calls_moving_the_election_to_Wed.html) . 
I’ve spent a lot of time recently looking at allegations of voter  
suppression, voter intimidation, and dirty tricks since 2000 for a chapter of  The 
Voting Wars.  Unlike allegations of voter fraud, my  conclusion is that there 
are real attempts at voter suppression and  voter intimidation, though some 
claims are false and many are  exaggerated.  However, there is little 
evidence that such  schemes usually work.  (The chapter covers, among other 
things, the 2002  New Hampshire phone jamming case, the 2010 “Don’t Vote” ads in 
Nevada by  “Latinos for Reform,” the effects of new voter identification 
laws, claims of  hacking of voting machines, and the New Black Panthers 
incident.)  Some  schemes even may be counterproductive. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20284&title=Election%20Day%20Dirty%20Tricks&description=) 


Posted in _chicanery_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12) , _election  
administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18)  | Comments Off 

 
_Fake Primary Day in  Wisconsin_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20281)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20281)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
_Here_ 
(http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/12/wisconsin-recall-elections-underway/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+rs
s/cnn_politicalticker+(Blog:+Political+Ticker)) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20281&title=Fake%20Primary%20Day%20in%20Wisconsin&description=) 


Posted in _recall elections_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=11)   | 
Comments Off 

_“Darrell Issa  questions White House’s 2012 actions”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20277)  
Posted  on _July 12, 2011_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20277)  by _Rick 
Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
_Politico_ (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58755.html) :  “House 
Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa is probing what he sees as  signs 
of an unseemly overlap between President Barack Obama’s official and  
political activities.” 
MORE: WaPo _profiles_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/six-months-into-chairmanship-issa-isnt-what-either-side-expected/2011/07/11/gIQA0Ghi9H_sto
ry.html)   Rep. Issa’s tenure as chair of the House Oversight and Reform 
Committee. 
UPDATE:  Rep. Issa’s letter is _here_ 
(http://www.politico.com/static/PPM153_camp.html) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20277&title=“Darrell%20Issa%20questions%20White%20House’s%202012%20actions”
&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)   | 
Comments Off 
-- 
Rick Hasen
Professor of Law and Political  Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite  1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 -  fax
_rhasen at law.uci.edu_ (mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu) 
_http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html_ 
(http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html) 
_http://electionlawblog.org_ (http://electionlawblog.org/) 



_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing  list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0001.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0002.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0003.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0004.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0005.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0006.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0007.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0008.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0009.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110713/6f9406be/attachment-0010.bin>


View list directory