[EL] Check out 'Citizen conventions' should respond to Citizens United, Harvard la

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jul 25 08:58:31 PDT 2012


That may be so (and would not surprise me).  But this was a statement of 
a journalist in the National Journal.  Are you saying he was 
deliberately misleading?

On 7/25/2012 8:56 AM, Joe La Rue wrote:
> Rick, I don't have the time right now to find them, but I know I've 
> seen numerous press statements from Left-leaning organizations that 
> have implied if not out-right stated that corporations are giving 
> millions to candidates. Some of these organizations are regular 
> participants in the campaign finance law wars, so I assume that they 
> know the difference between IEs and contributions. The only reason I 
> can suppose for their misstatements is that it's deliberate on their 
> parts.
> Joe
> ___________________
> *Joseph E. La Rue*
> cell: 480.272.2715
> email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com <mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any 
> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
> contain confidential and privileged information or otherwise be 
> protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, 
> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of 
> the original message.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu 
> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>
>     I think that's right. But my theory is no more unlikely that Joe's
>     suggestion of a "deliberate effort to misstate the holding" of
>     Citizens United.
>
>
>     On 7/25/2012 8:22 AM, Smith, Brad wrote:
>>     I think it far more likely that the confusion stems from a)
>>     ignorance of reporters; b) carelessness of reporters; c)
>>     inadvertent, honest slips by informed reporters and editors and
>>     expert commentators; and d) the casual alarmism of the reform
>>     community and various politicians. The idea that is because of
>>     Jim Bopp's litigation, which most people have never heard of,
>>     which is rarely reported on or discussed in the press, and which,
>>     to the extreme anyone knows about it, would seem to make clear
>>     the distinction (as Rick points out, the courts keep upholding
>>     the distinction) strikes me as implausible in the extreme.
>>
>>     /Bradley A. Smith/
>>
>>     /Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault/
>>
>>     /   Professor of Law/
>>
>>     /Capital University Law School/
>>
>>     /303 E. Broad St./
>>
>>     /Columbus, OH 43215/
>>
>>     /614.236.6317 <tel:614.236.6317>/
>>
>>     /http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx/
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     *
>>     *
>>
>>     *From:*law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>>     <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>
>>     [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf
>>     Of *Rick Hasen
>>     *Sent:* Wednesday, July 25, 2012 10:41 AM
>>     *To:* Joe La Rue
>>     *Cc:* JBoppjr at aol.com <mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>;
>>     law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
>>     *Subject:* Re: [EL] Check out 'Citizen conventions' should
>>     respond to Citizens United, Harvard la
>>
>>     I agree with you that the holding is misstated.  I wonder if part
>>     of the confusion stems from the claims you and Jim have been
>>     making around the country (including in the San Diego case I
>>     litigated against you) in which you claimed that Citizens United
>>     compelled lower courts to strike down bans on direct corporate
>>     contributions to candidates.  So far,  your argument has been
>>     rejected by at least the 2nd, 4th, and 9th circuits, and is
>>     pending en banc in the 8th circuit in the Swanson case.  Yet I
>>     believe Jim is still making the argument.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 7/25/2012 7:11 AM, Joe La Rue wrote:
>>
>>         You don't think there's a deliberate effort to misstate the
>>         holding, do you, Jim? Surely not!
>>
>>         Joe
>>         ___________________
>>         *Joseph E. La Rue*
>>
>>         cell: 480.272.2715 <tel:480.272.2715>
>>         email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com <mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>         CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any
>>         attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>>         and may contain confidential and privileged information or
>>         otherwise be protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use,
>>         disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
>>         intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail
>>         and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>
>>
>>
>>         On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 6:13 AM, <JBoppjr at aol.com
>>         <mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Click here: 'Citizen conventions' should respond to Citizens
>>         United, Harvard law professor suggests
>>         <http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202564277666>
>>
>>         This is a classic example of the frequently distorted
>>         description of what /Citizens United/ did:
>>
>>         /In Citizens United, the Court found that corporations and
>>         unions cannot be banned from making independent expenditures
>>         to political action committees or candidates.//
>>
>>         /The subcommittee hearing examined the possibility of a
>>         constitutional amendment that would give Congress the
>>         authority to regulate campaign contributions by businesses//.
>>
>>         One reading this would conclude appropriately that /CU/ made
>>         contribution to candidates by businesses legal.  Of course,
>>         the ruling itself did not.
>>
>>         And what is so puzzling is why this happens when it is so
>>         easy to get it right. Jim Bopp
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Law-election mailing list
>>         Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>         <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>>         http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     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  <tel:949.824.3072>  - office
>>     949.824.0495  <tel: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://electionlawblog.org
>>     Pre-order The Voting Wars:http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
>>     www.thevotingwars.com  <http://www.thevotingwars.com>
>
>     -- 
>     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  <tel:949.824.3072>  - office
>     949.824.0495  <tel: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://electionlawblog.org
>     Pre-order The Voting Wars:http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
>     www.thevotingwars.com  <http://www.thevotingwars.com>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Law-election mailing list
>     Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>     <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>     http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>

-- 
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
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org
Pre-order The Voting Wars: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
www.thevotingwars.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120725/5e063d3e/attachment.html>


View list directory