[EL] Truth to power?
BZall at aol.com
BZall at aol.com
Tue Feb 21 15:39:26 PST 2012
True, Joe, and don't forget, also, the fact that the concurrence about
"huge sums" rests on evidence not in the record of the original Montana
district court in this case. Given the requirements in recent cases for specific
factual assertions demonstrating actual effect on First Amendment rights
(e.g., Phelps, and Doe v Reed), how is that kind of reference helpful? It's
great to jaw about titanic clashes, but most of the Justices probably want
to see some actual record. So, if anything, RBG is asking to be flooded with
Brandeis briefs; not a pleasant prospect for most of the Court in these
days of multi-dozen amici filings, and probably exactly the opposite of what
she thought she was asking for.
Barnaby Zall
Of Counsel
Weinberg, Jacobs & Tolani, LLP
Please note our new address:
10411 Motor City Dr., Suite 500
Bethesda, MD 20817
301-231-6943 (direct dial)
_www.wjlaw.com_ (http://www.wj/)
bzall at aol.com
_____________________________________________________________
U.S. Treasury Circular 230 Notice
Any U.S. federal tax advice included in this communication (including
any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding U.S. federal tax-related penalties
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
tax-related matter addressed herein.
_____________________________________________________________
Confidentiality
The information contained in this communication may be confidential, is
intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally
privileged. It is not intended as legal advice, and may not be relied upon
or used as legal advice. Nor does this communication establish an attorney
client relationship between us. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please re-send this communication to the sender and delete the original
message and any copy of it from your computer system. Thank you.
______________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/21/2012 6:23:39 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jbirkenstock at capdale.com writes:
I’m curious about a different aspect of the statement from Justices
Ginsburg and Breyer in the Montana stay order. Specifically, wasn’t it a mistake
for those justices to frame their concerns with reference to the “huge sums
” being spent in this cycle via superPACs and other independent
expenditure efforts?
Maybe that was meant as an allusion to Caperton, but either way it still
seems to me that, at least in Justice Kennedy’s eyes, the door to using the
*hugeness* of the sums, per se, as a basis for regulation has been pretty
thoroughly slammed shut and triple-deadbolted. Whereas the question of the
“independence” of functionally single-candidate IE committees for which
the candidate him- or herself directly solicits funds (while conspicuously
not anointing any other IE efforts with similar solicitations) seems still
relatively open for discussion.
Not open as a matter of a Part 109 analysis, necessarily, but more in the
sense that this does not appear to be the kind of “independence” reflected
in the facts of the actual case before the Court in Citizens United, nor
in the section of Justice Kennedy’s opinion in which the Court “conclude[s]
that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do
not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.” (Nor in
Buckley’s holding on the FECA IE limit, nor in Colorado Republican’s holding on
IE’s by party committees, nor in any other holding I’m aware of.)
Point being that, in my opinion, Ginsburg and Breyer seem to have picked a
strange basis for their observation if the subtext of it was meant to
invite Justice Kennedy to candidly evaluate whether the premises he offered for
that conclusion have borne out in reality. Thoughts/agree/disagree?
________________________________
Joseph M. Birkenstock, Esq.
Caplin & Drysdale, Chtd.
One Thomas Circle, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 862-7836
_www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock_ (http://www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock)
*also admitted to practice in CA
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Smith, Brad
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 1:16 PM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Truth to power?
“Justice Ginsburg is ready to speak truth to power, I argue in this Slate
commentary published on President’s Day”
Umm, Justice Ginsburg is a member of the Supreme Court of the United
States. She is power. Truth? What truth was there in her little Western
Tradition Partnership concurrence? Didn’t she just offer an opinion, slandering
both donors and candidates, without any facts at all? Traditionally, when we
say one is speaking truth to power, we think of one taking a courageous
stand that will impose on them real personal costs. What courage is there in
sheepishly following conventional wisdom, with no examination of the facts,
on campaign finance, to align oneself with the New York Times and the
Washington Post and all the organs of power that will sing your accolades? And
what would Justice Ginsburg’s position do, if adopted? It would increase the
power of her employer, the Federal government, and decrease the First
Amendment freedoms of American citizens.
If that’s called speaking truth to power, give me some lies.
Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
Designated Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 East Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 236-6317
_bsmith at law.capital.edu_ (mailto:bsmith at law.capital.edu)
_http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp_
(http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp)
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 11:05 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 2/21/12
_ICYMI: Dems May Exaggerate Voter ID Effects, But Laws Should Still Be
Opposed_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30264)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:59 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30264) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Last week, Yale University Press released a sneak preview from my
forthcoming book, _The Voting Wars_ (http://amzn.to/y22ZTv) . The preview is _The
Fraudulent Fraud Squad: Understanding the Battle Over Voter ID_
(http://www.amazon.com/Fraudulent-Fraud-Squad-Understanding-ebook/dp/B00795X5XI/ref=zg_b
s_157417011_9) .
In connection with the release, I wrote two blog posts:
_How many voters actually deterred by new Republican voting laws?_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=29665)
and
_Why Tough State Voter ID Laws Should Be Opposed—Even If Effects of Law on
Turnout May Be Small and Claims Exaggerated_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30177) .
Jonathan Adler _discussed_
(http://volokh.com/2012/02/18/for-and-against-voter-id-exaggeration-all-around/) the chapter on Volokh, and there are now
178 comments posted—many of which illustrate the intensity of partisan
feeling in The Voting Wars. Similarly, there are 78 strong comments to Eric
Black’s _MinnPost article _
(http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2012/02/whos-and-against-voter-photo-id-and-why) on my chapter.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30264&title=ICYMI:%20Dems%20May%20Exaggerate%20Voter%20ID%20Effects,%20But%20Laws
%20Should%20Still%20Be%20Opposed&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_fraudulent fraud squad_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8) , _The Voting
Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter id_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) | Comments Off
_ICYMI: Occupy the Super PACs_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30262)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:49 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30262) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Justice Ginsburg is ready to speak truth to power, I argue in _this Slate
commentary_
(http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/02/justice_ruth_bader_ginsburg_is_ready_to_speak_out_on_the_danger_of_super_pa
cs_.html?wpisrc=slate_river) published on President’s Day.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30262&title=ICYMI:%20Occupy%20the%20Super%20PACs&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Voter ID coming to North Carolina?”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30260)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:47 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30260) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_The latest_
(http://www.southernstudies.org/2012/02/voter-id-coming-to-north-carolina.html) from Facing South.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30260&title=“Voter%20ID%20coming%20to%20North%20Carolina?”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter id_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) | Comments Off
_“WISCONSIN SUED OVER RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY VOTER LAW”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30258)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:45 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30258) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
The following press release arrived via email:
WISCONSIN SUED OVER RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY VOTER LAW
FIRST SUIT TO SPECIFICALLY CHARGE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
78 PERCENT OF YOUNG BLACK MEN COULD BE BARRED FROM THE POLLS
Milwaukee, WI – Advancement Project, joined by the League of Young Voters
and the Milwaukee Area Labor Council, will file the first lawsuit based on
a claim of racial discrimination against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
and members of the Government Accountability Board charging that a newly
enacted restrictive voter identification law specifically discriminates against
African American and Latino voters.
The lawsuit, to be filed Thursday February 23, challenges Wisconsin Act 23
under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits the institution
of any electoral procedures that deny or abridge the rights of citizens to
vote on account of race or color.
“This law is a part of the largest legislative effort to turn back the
clock on voting rights in our nation in over a century and shows how essential
the Voting Rights Act is to allow all Americans their right to vote,”
states Advancement Project co director Judith Browne Dianis, one of the nation’
s leading civil rights litigators. “If this bill is allowed to stand it
will undermine the basic fabric of our nation’s democracy.”
Studies in Wisconsin have confirmed that racial minorities, especially
African American and Latino voters, are far less likely to have a
Wisconsin-issued ID, finding that roughly half of the state’s African Americans and
Latinos lack a valid driver’s license. Specifically, a 2005 study determined
that 55% of Black males and 46% of Hispanic males – as compared with only
16% of white males – lack a driver’s license. Among females, 49% of
African Americans and 59% of Latinas lacked a driver’s license as compared to 17%
of Whites.
When age and race are considered together, the disparities become far more
pronounced: an astounding 78% of African-American males (as compared with
36% of White males) aged 18-24 lack a driver’s license, and 66% of
African-American females (as compared with 25% of White females) aged 18-24 lack a
driver’s license. The study also found a disparate impact on Latino
voters: 57% of young Latino males age 18-24 lack a driver’s license, as compared
to 36% of White males age 18-24.
One of the lead plaintiffs is Bettye Jones, 77, who was born at home in
Tennessee and had no birth certificate filed of her birth. She has voted in
every election since 1956 and advocated as a civil rights activist for the
Voting Rights Act. Despite being a registered voter, and having a valid and
current ID from another state, she will not be allowed to vote. She has
tried in vain to get a voter ID and will be disenfranchised in April’s primary
elections as a result.
Wisconsin’s law, the strictest voter identification law in the nation,
requires citizens to present limited forms of current, government-issued photo
identification before receiving a ballot. Commonly held forms of
identification like state or federal employee IDs, veterans’ cards, most college
and university identification cards, and out-of-state or expired driver’s
licenses are not allowed.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30258&title=“WISCONSIN%20SUED%20OVER%20RACIALLY%20DISCRIMINATORY%20VOTER%20LAW”
&description=)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter
id_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) , _Voting Rights Act_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15) | Comments Off
_“Ending secret money in politics”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30255)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:41 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30255) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
A WaPo _editorial._
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ending-secret-money-in-politics/2012/02/16/gIQAOIq5NR_story.html)
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30255&title=“Ending%20secret%20money%20in%20politics”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“The Other Side of Inaccuracy: More Than 50 Million Unregistered”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30253)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:40 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30253) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
A _ChapinBlog._
(http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/peea/2012/02/the_other_side_of_inaccuracy_m.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed
:+HHHElections+(Program+for+Excellence+in+Election+Administration))
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30253&title=“
The%20Other%20Side%20of%20Inaccuracy:%20More%20Than%2050%20Million%20Unregistered”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_voter registration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37) | Comments Off
_“Romney Benefits From Campaign, SuperPAC Funds”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30249)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:33 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30249) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Peter Overby _reports_
(http://www.npr.org/2012/02/21/147176912/romney-outspends-gop-field-combined-in-january) for NPR.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30249&title=“Romney%20Benefits%20From%20Campaign,%20SuperPAC%20Funds”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Billionaire Sheldon Adelson Says He Might Give $100M To Newt Gingrich Or
Other Republican”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30247)
Posted on _February 21, 2012 7:31 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30247) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Wow._
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2012/02/21/billionaire-sheldon-adelson-says-he-might-give-100m-to-newt-gingrich-or-other-republican/)
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30247&title=“
Billionaire%20Sheldon%20Adelson%20Says%20He%20Might%20Give%20$100M%20To%20Newt%20Gingrich%20Or%20Other%20Republican”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_Santorum Gets a Second Super PAC Angel_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30244)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:35 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30244) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Politico _reports_ (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73095.html) .
Thought experiment: what would the Republican campaign look like if we
could still enforce the $5,000 individual contribution limit on PACS, if
corporate and labor union treasury funds could not go into PACs, and if
contributions to 527s remained under a legal cloud?
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30244&title=Santorum%20Gets%20a%20Second%20Super%20PAC%20Angel&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Super PACs dominating Republican presidential race”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30237)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:27 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30237) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Okay, I’m overusing “must-read” today, but you must read _Dan Eggen_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/super-pacs-dominating-republican-presiden
tial-race/2012/02/20/gIQANOaGQR_story.html) : “Super PACs and other groups
dominated the race for the Republican presidential nomination last month,
raising and spending tens of millions of dollars outside the traditional
campaign system and playing a key role in extending an already tumultuous
contest, according to new disclosures filed Monday.”
And _more Eggen_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/2012/02/20/gIQAGxoJQR_blog.html) :”Now we know why some Obama supporters may
have been so panicked: Priorities USA Action, the main pro-Obama super PAC,
raised just $58,815.83 in January, according to a _report filed late
Monday _ (http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00495861/767177/) with
the Federal Election Commission.”
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30237&title=“Super%20PACs%20dominating%20Republican%20presidential%20race”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Financial disclosures show power of super PACs”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30235)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:25 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30235) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Great USA Today piece _
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-02-20/filings-presidential-race-money/53180872/1) by Fredreka Schouten.
Clearly, the campaign finance beat reporters did not take President’s Day
off.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30235&title=“Financial%20disclosures%20show%20power%20of%20super%20PACs”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Conservatives push a ‘legal assault’ on the Voting Rights Act”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30232)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:22 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30232) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_This item _
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/20/1063208/-Conservatives-push-a-legal-assault-on-the-Voting-Rights-nbsp-Act-) appears at Daily
Kos.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30232&title=“Conservatives%20push%20a%20‘legal%20assault’
%20on%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act”&description=)
Posted in _The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _Voting
Rights Act_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15) | Comments Off
_“Study: Negative campaign ads much more frequent, vicious than in
primaries past”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30229)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:18 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30229) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Must read Farnam _analysis_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/study-negative-campaign-ads-much-more-frequent-vicious-than-in-primaries-past/2012/0
2/14/gIQAR7ifPR_story.html) in WaPo. And the evidence bears out the
anecdotal reporting that Super PACs go more negative because they are
unaccountable: “Data show that super PACs, which have run more advertising than the
campaigns themselves, have spent 72 percent of their money on negative ads.
The figure for campaigns is 27 percent, according to a Washington Post
analysis of data from Kantar Media/Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks
television advertising across the country. (For this article, ads were
considered negative if they mentioned another GOP candidate.)”
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30229&title=“
Study:%20Negative%20campaign%20ads%20much%20more%20frequent,%20vicious%20than%20in%20primaries%20past”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“G.O.P. Campaigns Grow More Dependent on ‘Super PAC’ Aid”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30227)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 8:16 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30227) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Must read Nick Confessore _analysis_
(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/us/politics/super-pac-role-grows-for-republican-campaigns.html?_r=1&hp) in
the NYT.
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30227&title=“G.O.P.%20Campaigns%20Grow%20More%20Dependent%20on%20‘Super%20PAC’
%20Aid”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“The (Non-)Effects of Campaign Finance Spending Bans on Macro Political
Outcomes: Evidence From the States”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30222)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 12:25 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30222) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Ray La Raja and Brian Schaffner have uploaded _this important draft paper_
(http://people.umass.edu/schaffne/laraja_schaffner_spendingbans.pdf) .
Here is the abstract:
This paper seeks to understand the effect of campaign finance laws on
electoral and policy Spurred by the recent Supreme Court decision, Citizens
United v. FEC (2010), which bans on corporate and union political spending,
the study focuses on whether such bans generate consequences notably
different from an electoral system that lacks such bans. We observe three key
outcomes: partisan control of government, incumbent reelection rates and
corporate tax burdens. Using historical data on regulations in 49 American states
between 1935 and 2009 we test alternative models for evaluating the impact
of corporate and union spending bans put in place during this period. The
results indicate that spending bans appear to have limited, if any, effect
on these outcomes.
I very much look forward to reading this paper! Note that the paper
attempts to measure the effects of spending on electoral outcomes, not
legislative outcomes (and the latter in my view is a bigger problem).
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30222&title=“
The%20(Non-)Effects%20of%20Campaign%20Finance%20Spending%20Bans%20on%20Macro%20Political%20Outcomes:%20Evidence%20From%20the%20States”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) |
Comments Off
_“Racism alleged in voter ID campaign”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30220)
Posted on _February 20, 2012 12:22 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30220) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
MPR _reports_
(http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2012/02/racism_alleged.shtml) .
(http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=30220&title=“Racism%20alleged%20in%20voter%20ID%20campaign”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter id_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) | Comments Off
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's 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/)
<- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -> To
ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that,
unless specifically indicated otherwise, any 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 tax-related
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. This
message is for the use of the intended recipient only. It is from a law firm and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are
not the intended recipient any disclosure, copying, future distribution, or
use of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please advise us by return e-mail, or if you have received
this communication by fax advise us by telephone and delete/destroy the
document. <-->
_______________________________________________
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/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0001.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0002.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0003.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0004.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0005.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0006.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0007.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0008.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0009.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0010.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0011.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0012.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0013.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0014.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120221/4c1259c9/attachment-0015.bin>
View list directory