[EL] Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News

JBoppjr at aol.com JBoppjr at aol.com
Sun Nov 27 05:38:20 PST 2011


Regarding this:
 
_“A rogue convention? How  GOP party rules may surprise in 2012″_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25758)  
Posted on  _November 26, 2011 2:51 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25758)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)  
 
Rob Richie and Elise Helgesen have written_ this  Politico oped_ 
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69048.html) . 
This article is wrong about the RNC rules. The  RNC Rules prohibit a "unit 
rule." A unit rule is a term of art which does not  mean a winner-take-all 
primary. A unit rule mean allowing a delegation to vote  by majority vote to 
require all delegates in the delegation to vote a certain  way.  
_Click here: unit rule  - definition of unit rule by the Free Online 
Dictionary, Thesaurus and  Encyclopedia._ 
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/unit+rule)  
We outlaw a unit rule, in Rule 38, not winner- take-all primaries. 
James Bopp, Jr. 
National Committeeman - Indiana
Vice  Chairman
Republican National Committee
The Bopp Law Firm
The National  Building
1 South 6th Street
Terre Haute, IN 47807
voice:  812-232-2434
fax: 812-235-3685
cell: 812-243-0825
e-mail: _jboppjr at aol.com_ (mailto:jboppjr at aol.com) 

 
In a message dated 11/26/2011 7:07:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:

 
_Breaking News: Texas  Going to U.S. Supreme Court to Block Congressional 
Redistricting Plan_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25774)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 4:04 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25774)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
The state’s press release is _here_ 
(http://txredistricting.org/post/13369705027/abbott-will-seek-stay-from-supreme-court-on-monday) ,  and it 
announces Paul Clement as part of Texas’s legal team.  The three  judge court 
adopted the congressional plan it announced as tentative on  Wednesday without any 
changes.  Judge Smith dissented.  See the  opinions _here_ 
(http://tinyurl.com/6oadgqh) .  (There were also _opinions  with a dissen_ 
(http://txredistricting.org/post/13354018047/where-things-stand-as-of-saturday-morning) t on 
the state legislative plans, and those too may get  brought to SCOTUS in the 
near future.) 
The congressional plan adopted by the three-judge court in San Antonio  
(because of the Court’s failure to obtain preclearance in time from a  
three-judge court in DC) is seen to benefit Democrats, and partisan politics  is the 
subtext for this voting rights challenge. 
Judge Smith in his dissent raises some meaty (and thorny) Supreme Court  
questions, but I am not at all sure the Court would want to wade into this  
now, on such a truncated time frame (filing for the congressional seats is  
Monday, unless blocked by a Supreme Court stay) and for these lines which will 
 just be used in these elections. 
The Court majority also took a dig at Texas, explaining that it likely  
would not have been in this mess had it applied to DOJ for preclearance rather  
than bypassing DOJ and going instead to a three-judge court. 
To keep up on all things related to this case, follow _Texas  
Redistricting_ (http://txredistricting.org/) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25774&title=Breaking%20News:%20Texas%20Going%20to%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20to%2
0Block%20Congressional%20Redistricting%20Plan&description=) 


Posted in _Department of  Justice_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26) , 
_redistricting_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6) , _Supreme Court_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29) , _Voting Rights Act_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)   | Comments Off 

 
_WaPo Profiles  Americans Elect_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25772)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 3:51 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25772)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
_Here_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/moderate-americans-elect-group-hoping-to-add-third-candidate-to-2012-election-ballot/2011/11/21/gIQAtPpMt
N_story.html?tid=pm_pop) .   And at least it makes a brief mention (near 
the end of the article) of the  potential_ democracy  problems_ 
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67965.html)  with the group. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25772&title=<i>WaPo</i>%20Profiles%20Americans%20Elect&description=) 


Posted in _third parties_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47)   | Comments 
Off 

 
_12 Charged with  Absentee Ballot Fraud in Ga; Daily Caller Inexplicably 
Ties this to  Need for Voter ID_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25764)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 3:40 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25764)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
_Here_ 
(http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/24/12-charged-with-voter-fraud-in-georgia-election/) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25764&title=12%20Charged%20with%20Absentee%20Ballot%20Fraud%20in%20Ga;%20<i>Daily
%20Caller</i>%20Inexplicably%20Ties%20this%20to%20Need%20for%20Voter%20ID&de
scription=) 


Posted in _election  administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) , 
_voter id_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9)   | Comments Off 

 
_“House to Take Up New  Bill to Repeal Presidential Campaign Funding, EAC”
_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25761)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 3:36 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25761)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
_BNA_ 
(http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=23679558&vname=mpebulallissues&fn=23679558&jd=a0c9u8r3g3&split=0) :  “The House is set 
to take up new legislation the week of Nov. 28 that would  seek cuts in 
federal spending by repealing the 35-year-old federal law  providing public 
funding for presidential campaigns and eliminating the  Election Assistance 
Commission. The new measure (H.R. 3463) is sponsored by  Rep. Gregg Harper 
(R-Miss.) and is set for consideration in the House Rules  Committee on Nov. 29. 
House GOP leaders announced they plan to bring the bill  to the floor as 
soon as Dec. 1.” 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25761&title=“
House%20to%20Take%20Up%20New%20Bill%20to%20Repeal%20Presidential%20Campaign%20Funding,%20EAC”&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) ,  
_election  administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) , _Election 
Assistance  Commission_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34)  | Comments Off 

 
_“A rogue convention?  How GOP party rules may surprise in 2012″_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25758)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 2:51 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25758)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
Rob Richie and Elise Helgesen have written_ this  Politico oped_ 
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69048.html) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25758&title=“
A%20rogue%20convention?%20How%20GOP%20party%20rules%20may%20surprise%20in%202012″&description=) 


Posted in _political parties_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25) ,  
_primaries_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32)   | Comments Off 

 
_What Brings Ds and Rs  Together?_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25755)  
Posted  on _November 26, 2011 2:48 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25755)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
Concern about _election  transparency_ 
(http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20111124/COLUMN/111129937/1021&parentprofile=1061)  in Colorado and support 
for _instant  runoff voting_ 
(http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/nov/25/guest-column-next-election-use-instant-runoff/)  in Memphis. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25755&title=What%20Brings%20Ds%20and%20Rs%20Together?&description=) 


Posted in _alternative voting  systems_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63) , _election  administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18)  | 
Comments Off 

 
_“Walmart Wins Big with  California Initiatives”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25752)  
Posted  on _November 23, 2011 7:24 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25752)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
California Watch _reports_ 
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/23/BA0O1M3DNR.DTL) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25752&title=“Walmart%20Wins%20Big%20with%20California%20Initiatives”
&description=) 


Posted in _direct democracy_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62)   | 
Comments Off 

 
_“Political Disclosure  Won’t Inhibit Corporate Speech”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25750)  
Posted  on _November 23, 2011 6:00 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25750)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
Bruce Freed has written _this  letter to the editor_ 
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204190504577036601127629604.html?mod=djemITP_h)  
responding to a _recent  WSJ oped_ 
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577018623513596432.html)  by Brad Smith. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25750&title=“Political%20Disclosure%20Won’t%20Inhibit%20Corporate%20Speech”
&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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/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/20111127/4e622239/attachment-0005.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Untitled01
Type: image/unknown
Size: 43240 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111127/4e622239/attachment-0006.bin>


View list directory