[EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/30/12

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Fri Nov 30 07:23:47 PST 2012


    "Texas Voter ID Suit May Await Related High Court Ruling"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44906>

Posted on November 30, 2012 7:19 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44906> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-29/texas-voter-id-suit-may-await-related-high-court-ruling.html>: 
"The U.S. Justice Department 
<http://topics.bloomberg.com/justice-department/> agreed to defer 
further proceedings in a lawsuit filed by Texas over the state's voter 
identification law until the Supreme Court 
<http://topics.bloomberg.com/supreme-court/> rules whether part of the 
Voting Rights Act is constitutional."

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44906&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Voter%20ID%20Suit%20May%20Await%20Related%20High%20Court%20Ruling%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, 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


    "Exclusive: The Internal Polls That Made Mitt Romney Think He'd Win"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44904>

Posted on November 30, 2012 7:18 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44904> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The New Republic reports. 
<http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/110597/exclusive-the-polls-made-mitt-romney-think-hed-win#>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44904&title=%E2%80%9CExclusive%3A%20The%20Internal%20Polls%20That%20Made%20Mitt%20Romney%20Think%20He%E2%80%99d%20Win%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    Federal Judge Upholding Nevada Anti-SSM Law Recently Smacked Down by
    Ninth Circuit <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44900>

Posted on November 29, 2012 8:59 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44900> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This evening's federal court decision 
<http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/114966393?extension=pdf&from=embed&source=embed> 
upholding Nevada's ban 
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/federal-judge-rules-the-nevada-can-ban-same-sex-co> 
on same sex marriages against constitutional challenge came from Chief 
Judge Robert C. Jones of the United States District Court for the 
District of Nevada.  As Sam Bagenstos notes, 
<https://twitter.com/sbagen/status/274337871543009280> this is the same 
judge who recently decided a controversial case regarding Nevada's "none 
of the above" election law.  Judge Jones in that case was not only 
reversed by the Ninth Circuit---he was smacked down 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=39602> in a concurring opinion by Judge 
Reinhardt (who also happens to be the author of the Ninth Circuit Prop. 
8 decision striking down California's anti-SSM ban).   And after Chief 
Judge Jones was smacked down, he smacked back at Judge Reinhardt in a 
statement <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=39724> accusing Judge Reinhardt 
of improper conduct in contacting his chambers.

Get out the popcorn as this new case goes forward.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44900&title=Federal%20Judge%20Upholding%20Nevada%20Anti-SSM%20Law%20Recently%20Smacked%20Down%20by%20Ninth%20Circuit&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off


    "The 2012 Voting Wars, Judicial Backstops, and the Resurrection of
    Bush v. Gore" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44898>

Posted on November 29, 2012 4:38 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44898> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I have posted this draft 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2182857>on SSRN 
(part of the George Washington Law Review symposium 
<http://www.law.gwu.edu/News/2012-2013Events/Pages/2012LawReviewSymposium.aspx> 
on election law).  Here is the abstract:

    In 2000, some scholars predicted the Supreme Court's controversial
    equal protection holding in Bush v. Gore that the state could not
    arbitrarily value one person's vote over that of another might be
    used to force states to improve their election processes through
    litigation. In the ensuing years, Bush v. Gore had not fulfilled
    that promise. Scholars debated when, if ever, the case could apply
    beyond the narrow facts of a statewide recount with inconsistent
    counting standards, but the courts seemed uninterested: the Supreme
    Court has failed to cite the case for any proposition, and the few
    lower courts which relied upon the case as precedent to create
    better and fairer voting conditions were overturned or limited. By
    2007 I lamented the "untimely death" of Bush v. Gore.
    A funny thing happened during 2012. The voting wars which had ensued
    since 2000 manifested themselves in a host of restrictive election
    rule changes passed in the name of fraud prevention and
    administrative convenience mostly by Republican legislatures and
    implemented by Republican election administrators. Democrats, the
    Department of Justice, and reform groups resisted the overreach,
    litigating over many of these changes. The results of this
    litigation was a mixed bag. For example, courts approved some voter
    identification laws, rejected others, and put Pennsylvania's and
    Wisconsin's laws on hold for this election season but perhaps not
    beyond that. Overall, it appeared that in the most egregious cases
    of partisan overreach, courts were serving, often with surprising
    unanimity, as a judicial backstop.
    In Ohio, one of the twin epicenters (along with Florida) of the 2012
    voting wars, two important cases relied in part on Bush v. Gore to
    expand voting rights. In one case, a conservative panel of the
    United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit---a court which
    had shown itself bitterly divided along party and ideological lines
    on election issues in 2008---unanimously held that Ohio's
    disenfranchisement of voters for voting in the wrong polling
    location because of poll worker error violated the equal protection
    clause. In the other case, another Sixth Circuit panel held that
    Ohio's contraction of the early voting period to exclude the weekend
    before the election, for all voters except certain military voters,
    violated the equal protection clause under Bush v. Gore. The court
    so held despite the fact that Ohio provided 23 days of early voting
    and for the first time sent all Ohio voters a no-excuse absentee
    ballot application. This latter ruling was at best a major stretch
    of Bush v. Gore and existing precedent.
    The story of the 2012 voting wars is a story of Republican
    legislative and to some extent administrative overreach to contract
    voting rights, followed by a judicial and public backlash. The
    public backlash was somewhat expected---Democrats predictably made
    "voter suppression" a key talking point of the campaign. The
    judicial backlash, and the resurrection of Bush v. Gore in the Sixth
    Circuit, was not. The judicial reaction, from liberal and
    conservative judges and often on a unanimous basis, suggests that
    courts may now be more willing to act as backstops to prevent
    egregious cutbacks in voting rights and perhaps to do even more to
    assure greater equality and fairness in voting. However, it is
    possible that this trend will reverse in future elections.

Comments welcome!

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44898&title=%E2%80%9CThe%202012%20Voting%20Wars%2C%20Judicial%20Backstops%2C%20and%20the%20Resurrection%20of%20Bush%20v.%20Gore%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>, 
election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "No more residency requirement for D.C. ballot petition
    circulators?" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44895>

Posted on November 29, 2012 3:20 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44895> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See here. 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mike-debonis/wp/2012/11/29/no-more-residency-requirement-for-d-c-ballot-petition-circulators/>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44895&title=%E2%80%9CNo%20more%20residency%20requirement%20for%20D.C.%20ballot%20petition%20circulators%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in ballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>, petition 
signature gathering <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39> | Comments Off


    "'By the way, we have to do something about that'; Experts weigh in
    on the lines and possible fixes" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44892>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:46 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44892> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

That's the lead story 
<http://www.electionline.org/index.php/2012/953-electionlineweekly-november-1-2012>in 
this week's Electionline Weekly.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44892&title=%E2%80%9C%E2%80%98By%20the%20way%2C%20we%20have%20to%20do%20something%20about%20that%E2%80%99%3B%20Experts%20weigh%20in%20on%20the%20lines%20and%20possible%20fixes%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "The Causal Context of Disparate Vote Denial"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44889>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:43 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44889> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Janai Nelson has posted this draft 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2180968>on SSRN 
(forhcoming, /Boston College Law Review/).  Here is the abstract:

    For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its
    amendments have remedied racial discrimination in the electoral
    process with unparalleled muscularity. However, modern vote denial
    practices that have a disparate impact on minority political
    participation increasingly fall outside the Act's ambit. As judicial
    tolerance of disparate impact claims has waned in other areas of
    law, the contours of Section 2, arguably the Act's most powerful
    provision, have also narrowed to fit the shifting landscape. Section
    2's "on account of race" standard to determine discrimination in
    voting has evolved from one of quasi-intent determined by a totality
    of the circumstances, to a short-lived intent requirement, followed
    by an enhanced disparate impact analysis, culminating in a more
    recent standard that simulates proximate cause. This Article
    proposes a test for Section 2 vote denial claims that comports with
    the narrowing construction of disparate impact claims and reclaims
    the robust contextual analysis that the Voting Rights Act
    contemplates. The "causal context" test proposed here is anchored to
    the "core values" of Section 2 mined from the legislative history of
    the Act, particularly the "Senate factors." The causal context
    analysis relies on proof of explicit or implicit bias, as well as
    circumstances internal and external to elections that give rise to
    disparate vote denial, without requiring proof of intent. This
    approach is historically consistent with the Act's totality of the
    circumstances test and cognizant of courts' increasing demands for
    proof of a causal link within disparate impact jurisprudence.
    Moreover, the proposed causal context analysis is consonant with
    recent federal proceedings evaluating the racially disparate impact
    of voter ID laws, voter purges, early voting restrictions, and other
    forms of modern vote denial.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44889&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Causal%20Context%20of%20Disparate%20Vote%20Denial%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off


    "The Promise and Limits of Citizens' Assemblies: Deliberation,
    Institutions and the Law of Democracy"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44886>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:38 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44886> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Michael Pal has posted this draft 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176808> on SSRN 
(forthcoming, /Queens Law Journal/). Here is the abstract:

    Recent experiments with deliberative democracy in British Columbia
    and Ontario have brought new life to the debate over electoral
    reform in Canada and have called into question the roles of the
    judiciary and the legislature on electoral law. In both provinces,
    Citizens' Assemblies composed of randomly selected members were
    tasked with deliberating on electoral reform and brining their
    recommendations to the electorate in a subsequent referendum. These
    Assemblies were lauded as innovative alternatives to the
    conventional legislative decision-making process. The author
    examines the potential and the limitations of the Assemblies, by
    situating the Citizens' Assembly mode within roader discussions bout
    the law of democracy. Specifically, the article explores how well
    the Assemblies in British Columbia and Ontario insulated electoral
    reform from manipulation by elected representatives. Although he
    concludes that those Assemblies were less successful at keeping
    politics out of the process than many have suggested, he argues that
    the model nevertheless makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing
    debate between structural theory and rights theory regarding
    election law and the right to vote. In light of the fact that both
    sides of the debate are dissatisfied with the Supreme Court of
    Canada's section 3 jurisprudence, there are good reasons for both
    structural theorists and rights theorists to support the continued
    use of Citizens' Assemblies on issues of electoral reform. The
    author concludes by offering recommendations for improving the
    Citizens' Assembly process in the future.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44886&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Promise%20and%20Limits%20of%20Citizens%E2%80%99%20Assemblies%3A%20Deliberation%2C%20Institutions%20and%20the%20Law%20of%20Democracy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in citizen commissions <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=7>, 
direct democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62> | Comments Off


    "Trevor Potter Tells (Almost) All During Reddit 'Ask Me Anything'"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44883>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:35 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44883> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See here 
<http://www.clcblog.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=498:trevor-potter-tells-almost-all-during-reddit-qask-me-anythingq->.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44883&title=%E2%80%9CTrevor%20Potter%20Tells%20%28Almost%29%20All%20During%20Reddit%20%E2%80%98Ask%20Me%20Anything%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    "Democratic Lawyer/Obama Advisor Bob Bauer to Teach at NYU"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44881>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:34 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44881> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WSJ law blog reports 
<http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/11/28/democratic-lawyerobama-advisor-bob-bauer-to-teach-at-nyu/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44881&title=%E2%80%9CDemocratic%20Lawyer%2FObama%20Advisor%20Bob%20Bauer%20to%20Teach%20at%20NYU%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51> | 
Comments Off


    "Embattled transgender lawmaker resigns after all"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44879>

Posted on November 29, 2012 2:33 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44879> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The latest 
<http://www.newhampshire.com/article/20121129/NEWS06/121129074/0/newhampshire11> 
from NH.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D44879&title=%E2%80%9CEmbattled%20transgender%20lawmaker%20resigns%20after%20all%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59> | 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
Now available: The Voting Wars: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121130/8245421d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121130/8245421d/attachment.png>


View list directory