[EL] Law-election Digest, Vol 7, Issue 27

Winslow, Daniel B. dwinslow at proskauer.com
Sun Nov 27 12:02:40 PST 2011


I concur with Richard Winger's sentiment, that this election law
listserv is most helpful and a valuable connection to the latest tips of
the trade.  Best wishes for a happy and healthy holiday season all.

Dan Winslow

Daniel B. Winslow 
Senior Counsel 

Proskauer
One International Place
Boston, MA 02110-2600
d 617.526.9736
f  617.526.9899
dwinslow at proskauer.com 

greenspaces
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of
law-election-request at department-lists.uci.edu
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 3:00 PM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Law-election Digest, Vol 7, Issue 27

Send Law-election mailing list submissions to
	law-election at department-lists.uci.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	law-election-request at department-lists.uci.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
	law-election-owner at department-lists.uci.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Law-election digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News (Rick Hasen)
   2.  Frontiers of SuperPAC coordination? (Ben Smith)
   3. Re: Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News (Rick Hasen)
   4. Re: Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News (JBoppjr at aol.com)
   5. Re: Frontiers of SuperPAC coordination? (JBoppjr at aol.com)
   6. a post-thanksgiving thought about election law list
      (Richard Winger)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 16:06:58 -0800
From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News
To: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
Message-ID: <4ED17F22.4010809 at law.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
126/6cb75647/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
126/6cb75647/attachment-0001.png 

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 19:51:50 -0500
From: Ben Smith <benpolitico at gmail.com>
Subject: [EL]  Frontiers of SuperPAC coordination?
To: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
Message-ID:
	
<CAFk4=7MqJ4KLj1SwqQk32PTv-zOKeBbMnCg9wRH80khK6aiAmA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Happy Thanksgiving all. I'm de-lurking in the hopes that somebody had an
opinion on what I think is a novel situation: Rick Perry's campaign is
openly using footage shot and used by an allied SuperPAC in a campaign
ad.
Is that allowed?

Here's the piece:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1111/Perry_ad_features_SuprPAC_fo
otage.html

Is that allowed?

Ben
--
Ben Smith
Politico.com
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/
benpolitico at gmail.com
cell 202 731 4993
fax 866 293 7155
aim benobserver
\
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
126/84f8aed5/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 17:47:02 -0800
From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News
To: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
Message-ID: <4ED19696.703 at law.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
126/151ea1c1/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
126/151ea1c1/attachment-0001.png 

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 08:38:20 -0500 (EST)
From: JBoppjr at aol.com
Subject: Re: [EL] Texas redistricting to SCOTUS; More News
To: rhasen at law.uci.edu, law-election at uci.edu
Message-ID: <2342.6391fe22.3c03974c at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

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-sa
turday-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=25
774&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-h
oping-to-add-third-candidate-to-2012-election-ballot/2011/11/21/gIQAtPpM
t
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=25
772&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-georgi
a-election/) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25
764&title=12%20Charged%20with%20Absentee%20Ballot%20Fraud%20in%20Ga;%20<
i>Daily
%20Caller</i>%20Inexplicably%20Ties%20this%20to%20Need%20for%20Voter%20I
D&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=25
761&title=?
House%20to%20Take%20Up%20New%20Bill%20to%20Repeal%20Presidential%20Campa
ign%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=25
758&title=?
A%20rogue%20convention?%20How%20GOP%20party%20rules%20may%20surprise%20i
n%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&parent
profile=1061)  in Colorado and support 
for _instant  runoff voting_ 
(http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/nov/25/guest-column-next-elec
tion-use-instant-runoff/)  in Memphis. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25
755&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=25
752&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/SB100014240529702041905045770366011276296
04.html?mod=djemITP_h)  
responding to a _recent  WSJ oped_ 
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702037162045770186235135964
32.html)  by Brad Smith. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25
750&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/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0007.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0008.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0009.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0010.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0011.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0012.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/unknown
Size: 43240 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/4e622239/attachment-0013.bin 

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 08:44:40 -0500 (EST)
From: JBoppjr at aol.com
Subject: Re: [EL] Frontiers of SuperPAC coordination?
To: benpolitico at gmail.com, law-election at uci.edu
Message-ID: <24e9.2d340baf.3c0398c8 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Lurker Ben, interesting question and my view is -  no problem. A 
coordinated expenditure has two elements -- content of the ad and
conduct of the 
candidate and spender. If a spender uses a candidate's campaign
material, it 
meets the content requirement.  But the opposite does not.  Thus, if the

allied superPAC's material is in the public domain, then  anyone can use
it, 
including the candidate.  Jim Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 11/26/2011 7:52:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
benpolitico at gmail.com writes:

Happy Thanksgiving all. I'm de-lurking in the hopes that somebody had an

opinion on what I think is a novel situation: Rick Perry's campaign is
openly 
 using footage shot and used by an allied SuperPAC in a campaign ad. Is 
that  allowed?


Here's the piece: 
_http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1111/Perry_ad_features_SuprPAC_f
ootage.html_ 
(http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1111/Perry_ad_features_SuprPAC_f
ootage.html) 


Is that allowed?



Ben
-- 
Ben Smith
Politico.com
_http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/_ 
(http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/) 
_benpolitico at gmail.com_ (mailto:benpolitico at gmail.com) 
cell 202 731 4993
fax 866 293 7155
aim benobserver
\


_______________________________________________
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/20111
127/7369463b/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:32:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Richard Winger <richardwinger at yahoo.com>
Subject: [EL] a post-thanksgiving thought about election law list
To: law-election at uci.edu
Message-ID:
	<1322422333.60866.YahooMailClassic at web112617.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Many of us have said it before, but it never hurts to repeat, that the
election law list is a real benefit and we owe continuing gratitude to
the people who brought it into existence and keep it going.

Richard Winger

415-922-9779

PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111
127/a60e2560/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

End of Law-election Digest, Vol 7, Issue 27
*******************************************


**********************************************************
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by U.S. 
Treasury Regulations, Proskauer Rose LLP informs you that 
any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication 
(including any attachments) was not intended or written to 
be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) 
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) 
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any 
transaction or matter addressed herein.

*********************************************************
This message and its attachments are sent from a law firm
and may contain information that is confidential and 
protected by privilege from disclosure. If you are not the 
intended recipient, you are prohibited from printing, 
copying, forwarding or saving them. Please delete the 
message and attachments without printing, copying, 
forwarding or saving them, and notify the sender 
immediately.

===========================================================================================================




View list directory