[EL] 11th Amendment & Citizens United
Joe La Rue
joseph.e.larue at gmail.com
Tue May 29 04:42:38 PDT 2012
Regarding the proposal that the 11th Amendment requires the Supreme Court
to refuse to hear the new Citizens United style challenge, thereby
effectively allowing states to decide whether to strip First Amendment
freedoms by banning corporate political speech, one wonders whether
progressives would have thought that was a right outcome in the 1950s and
60s, with regards to civil rights? In other words, equality for all races
would have been the federal law, but not the law of, say, Alabama. Would
that be acceptable?
If not, then neither should this be. Both situations involve federal
constitutional law. And, last time I checked, the federal constitution has
a supremacy clause, which dictates that the federal constitution trumps any
attempts by the states to disregard it. So, states could not avoid the 14th
Amendment by appealing to state law. And Montana should not be able to
avoid the First Amendment by appealing to state law, either. And it seems
to me that, to be consistent, if you think that Montana should win on 10th
and 11th Amendment grounds, you also must think that segregation should
still be a possible outcome in individual states.
Joe
___________________
*Joseph E. La Rue*
cell: 513.509.6494
email: 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 Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
> “Hispanic boom may not shift Texas’ diversity in Congress”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34857>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 9:09 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34857> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Important AP report:<http://www.dallasnews.com/incoming/20120528-hispanic-boom-may-not-shift-texas-diversity-in-congress.ece>“One
> is a black real estate agent and the other a white millionaire. For two new
> districts created to reflect Texas’ soaring Hispanic population, they might
> be the representatives elected to Congress. That’s not exactly what
> Hispanic leaders pictured, and some are disheartened.”
>
> More: South Texas congressional candidates receive late cash<http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-on-the-potomac/2012/05/south-texas-congressional-candidates-receive-late-cash/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34857&title=%E2%80%9CHispanic%20boom%20may%20not%20shift%20Texas%E2%80%99%20diversity%20in%20Congress%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
> | Comments Off
> “End of the Charade” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34854>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 9:03 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34854> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT editorial
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/opinion/end-of-the-charade.html?hp>on
> the Chamber of Commerce and disclosure.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34854&title=%E2%80%9CEnd%20of%20the%20Charade%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “As the jury in the John Edwards case deliberates a week with no
> verdict, how long is too long?” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34851>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 8:55 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34851> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP reports.<http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/as-the-jury-in-the-john-edwards-case-deliberates-a-week-with-no-verdict-how-long-is-too-long/2012/05/28/gJQAybLcwU_story.html>
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34851&title=%E2%80%9CAs%20the%20jury%20in%20the%20John%20Edwards%20case%20deliberates%20a%20week%20with%20no%20verdict%2C%20how%20long%20is%20too%20long%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,
> chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, John Edwards<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=17>
> | Comments Off
> “Political Money Talks” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34847>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 8:13 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34847> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT editorial<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/opinion/political-money-talks.html?_r=1&ref=politics>:
> “As Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin faces a well deserved recall vote<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/us/politics/wisconsin-democrats-vote-for-challenger-to-scott-walker.html>next month after stripping public unions of their bargaining rights, voters
> are discovering the generosity of Diane Hendricks. Ms. Hendricks, the
> billionaire chairwoman of the nation’s largest roofing and siding
> wholesaler <http://www.abcsupply.com/media-center/fact-sheet>, wrote a
> check for $500,000 last month to help defend Governor Walker, a Republican,
> against his Democratic challenger, Tom Barrett, the mayor of Milwaukee<http://city.milwaukee.gov/Mayor>
> .”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34847&title=%E2%80%9CPolitical%20Money%20Talks%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, recall
> elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=11> | Comments Off
> “Our Imbecilic Constitution” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34845>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 8:12 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34845> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Sandy Levinson blogs
> <http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/28/our-imbecilic-constitution/?ref=politics>at
> NYT’s Campaign Stops blog.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34845&title=%E2%80%9COur%20Imbecilic%20Constitution%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> “Congressional Black Caucus rallies preachers to tackle voter-ID laws”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34842>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 8:05 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34842> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> McClatchy reports<http://www.lakewyliepilot.com/2012/05/28/1542433/congressional-black-caucus-rallies.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34842&title=%E2%80%9CCongressional%20Black%20Caucus%20rallies%20preachers%20to%20tackle%20voter-ID%20laws%E2%80%9D&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
> “$55 million for conservative campaigns — but where did it come from?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34840>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 8:04 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34840> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Must-read
> <http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-secret-money-20120528,0,3399955.story>LA
> Times report, with the subhead: “A group with ties to the billionaire Koch
> brothers doled it out in the 2010 election cycle, but the sources of the
> cash remain a mystery.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34840&title=%E2%80%9C%2455%20million%20for%20conservative%20campaigns%20%E2%80%94%20but%20where%20did%20it%20come%20from%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Campaigns mine online data to target voters”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34837>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 7:58 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34837> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP<http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g5IqenDmEunDOxRKNfQv7rYCScxA?docId=4a2481d5f77f4b53b326b8e62ce045e4>:
> Voters who click on President Barack Obama’s campaign website are likely to
> start seeing display ads promoting his re-election bid on their Facebook
> pages and other sites they visit. Voters searching Google for information
> about Mitt Romney may notice a 15-second ad promoting the Republican
> presidential hopeful the next time they watch a video online.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34837&title=%E2%80%9CCampaigns%20mine%20online%20data%20to%20target%20voters%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, social media
> and social protests <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=58> | Comments Off
> “Texas-style redistricting vexes voters, puts map boundaries in
> perpetual motion” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34834>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 7:55 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34834> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> WaPo reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-style-redistricting-vexes-voters-puts-map-boundaries-in-perpetual-motion/2012/05/27/gJQAVvC7uU_story.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34834&title=%E2%80%9CTexas-style%20redistricting%20vexes%20voters%2C%20puts%20map%20boundaries%20in%20perpetual%20motion%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
> | Comments Off
> “Big Money Corporate Spending in Elections May Lose in Supreme Court:
> Citizens United Ruling Faces Imminent Reversal”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34830>
> Posted on May 28, 2012 7:42 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34830> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Press release<http://www.11thamendment.org/2012/05/23/big-money-corporate-spending-in-elections-may-lose-in-supreme-court-citizens-united-ruling-faces-imminent-reversal/>:
> “Citizens United, the controversial 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that
> allows for virtually unlimited corporate spending in state elections, may
> face an immediate effective reversal if the Court refuses, on 11th
> Amendment constitutional grounds, to hear a case involving Citizens United
> and the State of Montana. The Eleventh Amendment Movement (TEAM,
> www.11thAmendment.org), a non-partisan political action association based
> in Hawaii, last week filed an amicus curiae “friend-of-the-court” brief t<http://www.11thamendment.org/2012/05/08/11th-amendment-supreme-court-briefs/>hat
> raises the 11th Amendment jurisdictional issue in the current case of
> American Tradition Partnership vs. Steve Bullock (Montana Attorney
> General). That case involves a recent Montana Supreme Court decision that
> upheld the state’s own anti-corruption election finance laws in defiance of
> the federally mandated Citizens United ruling. Montana’s decision has now
> been petitioned for appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court has
> not yet decided whether it will hear the appeal, but is expected to rule
> soon.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34830&title=%E2%80%9CBig%20Money%20Corporate%20Spending%20in%20Elections%20May%20Lose%20in%20Supreme%20Court%3A%20Citizens%20United%20Ruling%20Faces%20Imminent%20Reversal%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
> Pildes on Bullock on Redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34827>
> Posted on May 27, 2012 8:59 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34827> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> *Redistricting: The Most Political Activity in America*. By Charles S.
> Bullock III. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. 234p. $79.00 cloth,
> $25.00 paper.
> * *
>
> * Richard H. Pildes (2012).*
> Perspectives on Politics<http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=PPS>,
> Issue 02<http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=PPS&volumeId=10&bVolume=y#loc10%3E%3C/p%3E%3Cp%3E%20%E2%80%9C%3EVolume%2010%3C/a%3E,%3Cbr%20/%3E%3Ca%20href=>,
> June 2012 pp 495-496
>
> http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=8593683
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34827&title=Pildes%20on%20Bullock%20on%20Redistricting&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | Comments
> Off
> “Michigan: McCotter Could Get Booted from the Ballot”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34823>
> Posted on May 26, 2012 4:43 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34823> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> *Roll Call*:
> <http://atr.rollcall.com/michigan-mccotter-could-get-booted-from-the-ballot/>“Rep.
> Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) is at risk of losing his place on the Aug. 7
> primary ballot due to problems with his petition signatures, wreaking havoc
> on the GOP’s once secure hold on his seat.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34823&title=%E2%80%9CMichigan%3A%20McCotter%20Could%20Get%20Booted%20from%20the%20Ballot%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in ballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,
> petition signature gathering <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39> | Comments
> Off
> “Can State Laws Cohabit With Citizens United?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34821>
> Posted on May 26, 2012 4:41 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34821> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Linc Caplan has this opinion piece<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/opinion/sunday/can-state-laws-cohabit-with-citizens-united.html>in Sunday’s
> *New York Times*.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34821&title=%E2%80%9CCan%20State%20Laws%20Cohabit%20With%20Citizens%20United%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “D.C. Mayor’s Administration Mired In Scandal”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34818>
> Posted on May 26, 2012 2:39 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34818> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NPR<http://www.npr.org/2012/05/26/153782893/d-c-mayors-administration-mired-in-cloud-of-scandal?ft=1&f=1014&sc=tw>:
> “Washington, D.C., Mayor Vincent Gray was elected to office on a platform
> of anti-corruption. But just two years into his term, a federal
> investigation has left two former aides pleading guilty to misdeeds during
> the 2010 election. Gray has denied any wrongdoing. Host Guy Raz talks about
> D.C. politics with *Washington Post* reporter Nikita Stewart.”
>
> MORE: A scathing WaPo editorial<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-investigation-that-goes-to-the-heart-of-our-political-system/2012/05/23/gJQAfJOdlU_story.html>(via Election
> Law Center<http://electionlawcenter.com/2012/05/26/2010-dc-mayors-race-an-investigation-that-goes-to-the-heart-of-our-political-system.aspx>
> ).
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34818&title=%E2%80%9CD.C.%20Mayor%E2%80%99s%20Administration%20Mired%20In%20Scandal%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
> “Last filing on campaign finance” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34815>
> Posted on May 26, 2012 1:54 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=34815> by Rick
> Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Lyle Denniston<http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/05/filings-in-on-campaign-finance/>:
> “Acting quickly and setting the stage for the Supreme Court to act next
> month, challengers of a Montana law limiting corporations’ spending to
> influence state elections mailed their reply brief<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/11-1179_cert_reply-1.pdf> to
> the Court on Friday. Among other arguments, they urged the Court not to
> consider developments in campaign finance since the Court’s 2010 ruling
> that is centrally at issue: *Citizens United v. Federal Election
> Commission<http://www2.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Citizens_United_v_Federal_Election_Commission_130_S_Ct_876_175_L_>
> *. Again, they urged the Court to act summarily, without formal briefing
> and oral argument.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D34815&title=%E2%80%9CLast%20filing%20on%20campaign%20finance%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 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
> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
> http://electionlawblog.org
> Pre-order *The Voting Wars*: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120529/6ceaff21/attachment.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/20120529/6ceaff21/attachment.png>
View list directory