[EL] Doe v. Reed, more news

JBoppjr at aol.com JBoppjr at aol.com
Mon Oct 17 14:15:58 PDT 2011


This statement in the court's opinion is the key to the court's  erroneous 
decision:
 
"While Plaintiffs have not shown serious and widespread threats,  
harassment, or reprisals against the signers of R-71, or even that such activity  
would be reasonably likely to occur upon the publication of their names and  
contact information, they have developed substantial evidence that the public  
advocacy of traditional marriage as the exclusive definition of marriage, 
or the  expansion of rights for same sex partners, has engendered hostility 
in this  state, and risen to violence elsewhere, against some who have 
engaged in that  advocacy."
 
The court required the Plaintiffs to prove that the signers of the  R-71 
petition were themselves subject to harassment.  Of course,  this is to 
require an impossibility since the petitions have never been released  to the 
public, so that the public does not know who to target for  harassment. However, 
the court does find that the Plaintiffs have proven  that "public advocacy 
of traditional marriage as the exclusive definition of  marriage, or the 
expansion of rights for same sex partners, has engendered  hostility in this 
state, and risen to violence elsewhere, against some who have  engaged in that 
advocacy." We believe under the law that this is all that one  has to 
prove, since making public the signers of R-71 would disclose the  identity of 
people who advocate traditional marriage to the public for  harassment.  Jim 
Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 10/17/2011 3:06:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:

 
_Breaking News:  District Court Rejects Harassment Claims in Doe v. Reed_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24330)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 12:05 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24330)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
The state of Washington_  just won summary judgment_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/doevreed-summary-judgment.pdf)  on remand in the 
Doe v. Reed case  involving disclosure of the names of people signing a 
referendum concerning  Washington State’s gay rights law. 
>From the opinion: 
Applied here, the Court finds that Doe has only supplied evidence that  
hurts rather than helps its case. Doe has supplied minimal testimony from a  
few witnesses who, in their respective deposition testimony, stated either  
that police efforts to mitigate reported incidents was sufficient or  
unnecessary. Doe has supplied no evidence that police were or are now unable  or 
unwilling to mitigate any claimed harassment or are now unable or unwilling  to 
control the same, should disclosure be made. This is a quite different  
situation than the progeny of cases providing an as-applied exemption wherein  
the government was actually involved in carrying out the harassment, which 
was  historic, pervasive, and documented. To that end, the evidence supplied 
by Doe  purporting to be the best set of experiences of threats, harassment, 
or  reprisals suffered or reasonably likely to be suffered by R-71 signers 
cannot  be characterized as “serious and widespread.” 
Here is another excerpt from the Court’s conclusion: 
Considering the foregoing, Doe’s action based on Count II falls far short  
of those  an as-applied challenge has been successfully lodged to prevent  
disclosure of information otherwise obtainable under the PRA. Thus, the  State
’s undoubtedly important interest in disclosure prevails under exacting  
scrutiny. 
While Plaintiffs have not shown serious and widespread threats, harassment, 
 or reprisals against the signers of R-71, or even that such activity would 
be  reasonably likely to occur upon the publication of their names and 
contact  information, they have developed substantial evidence that the public 
advocacy  of traditional marriage as the exclusive definition of marriage, or 
the  expansion of rights for same sex partners, has engendered hostility in 
this  state, and risen to violence elsewhere, against some who have engaged 
in that  advocacy. This should concern every citizen and deserves the full 
attention of  law enforcement when the line gets crossed and an advocate 
becomes the victim  of a crime or is subject to a genuine threat of violence. 
The right of  individuals to
speak openly and associate with others who share common  views without 
justified fear of harm is at the very foundation of preserving a  free and open 
society. The facts before the Court in this case, however, do  not rise to 
the level of demonstrating that a reasonable probability of  threats, 
harassment, or reprisals exists as to
the signers of R-71, now  nearly two years after R-71 was submitted to the 
voters in Washington  State. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24330&title=Breaking%20News:%20District%20Court%20Rejects%20Harassment%20Claims%2
0in%20Doe%20v.%20Reed&description=) 


Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) ,  
_referendum_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=56)   | Comments Off 

 
_“From $25 to  $10,000,000: A Guide to Political Donations”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24328)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 12:01 pm_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24328)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
NYT launches very interesting_  interactive campaign finance guide_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/10/17/us/politics/a-guide-to-political-dona
tions.html?hp) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24328&title=“
From%20$25%20to%20$10,000,000:%20A%20Guide%20to%20Political%20Donations”&description=) 


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

 
_“Deep Sea Burial forms  first corporate ‘super PAC”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24325)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 10:23 am_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24325)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
WaPo _reports_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/deep-sea-burial-forms-first-corporate-super-pac/2011/10/17/gIQABaRnrL_story.html) .   My earlier 
coverage is _here._ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24304)  
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24325&title=“Deep%20Sea%20Burial%20forms%20first%20corporate%20‘super%20PAC”
&description=) 


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

 
_“U.S. District Court  Judge in Ohio Orders Secretary of State to Put 
Libertarian Party on 2012  Ballot”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24322)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 10:21 am_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24322)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
Libertarians _win  one_ 
(http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/10/17/u-s-district-court-judge-in-ohio-orders-secretary-of-state-to-put-libertarian-party-on-
2012-ballot/) . 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24322&title=“
U.S.%20District%20Court%20Judge%20in%20Ohio%20Orders%20Secretary%20of%20State%20to%20Put%20Libertarian%20Party%20on%202012%20Ballot”
&description=) 


Posted in _ballot access_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46)   | Comments 
Off 

 
_“Appeal filed in NJ  voting-machines lawsuit”_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24319)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 10:19 am_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24319)  by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
Andrew Appel has posted_  this item_ 
(https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/appeal-filed-nj-voting-machines-lawsuit)  at Freedom to Tinker. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24319&title=“Appeal%20filed%20in%20NJ%20voting-machines%20lawsuit”
&description=) 


Posted in _voting technology_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40)   | 
Comments Off 

_Absentee Ballot Fraud  Leads to Mayoral Resignation_ 
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24316)  
Posted  on _October 17, 2011 9:01 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24316) 
 by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)   
 
See _here_ 
(http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/mayor-resigns-following-voter-fraud-investigation/nFG6R/)   (via _RNLA_ 
(https://twitter.com/#!/TheRepLawyer/status/125954902311714816) ).  Once again voter fraud a state voter 
id law would not deter. 
 
 
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24316&title=Absentee%20Ballot%20Fraud%20Leads%20to%20Mayoral%20Resignation&descri
ption=) 


Posted in _absentee ballots_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53) ,  
_election  administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18)  | 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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/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/20111017/67218459/attachment-0005.bin>


View list directory