[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/31/13

[Rick Hasen]

    If the Court Strikes Down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act: An
    Online Reuters Symposium <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46784>

Posted on January 30, 2013 10:09 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46784> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

In cooperation with Reuters Opinion, I have organized an online 
symposium <http://www.reuters.com/subjects/voting-rights> on what should 
happen if the Supreme Court strikes down section 5 of the Voting Rights 
Act, an issue the Court is considering in Shelby County v. Holder, 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/> a 
case to be argued Feb. 27. My initial commentary 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/if-the-court-strikes-section-5-of-voting-rights-act/> 
begins:

    Reuters VRA symposium
    <http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2013/01/SCOTUC-5-ICON.jpg>We
    celebrated Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday last week in the shadow
    of a fight over the constitutionality of a key provision of the
    Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in
    /Shelby County v. Holder/
    <http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/>, raising
    the question whether Section 5 of the act, which requires that
    states and localities with a history of racial discrimination in
    voting get permission from the federal government before making any
    changes in election procedures, is now unconstitutional. The smart
    money
    <http://www.propublica.org/article/the-other-crucial-civil-rights-case-the-supreme-court-will-be-ruling-on>
    is on the court striking down the law as an improper exercise of
    congressional power, although Justice Anthony Kennedy or another
    justice could still surprise
    <http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/10/gop-v-voting-rights-act/>.

    If the court strikes Section 5, the big question is: What comes
    next? Reuters has invited a number of leading academics, who focus
    on voting rights and election law, to contribute to a forum on this
    question. In this introductory piece, I sketch out what may happen
    and what's at stake.

The initial responses are now up, and more will appear in coming days.  
Here are the first posts, with a snippet from each:

Opting into the Voting Rights Act 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/opting-into-the-voting-rights-act/> 
by Heather Gerken on Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 9:55 PM UTC: "I'm all for 
protecting every voter. But I would hate to lose what Section 5 provides 
-- protections for racial minorities, in particular. The other 
protections against racial discrimination in voting -- most notably, 
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act -- are too costly and cumbersome to 
protect racial minorities from the practices that Section 5 now deters.'

Why Section 5 survives 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/why-section-5-survives/>by 
Abigail Thernstrom on Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 9:58 PM UTC: "Reuters has 
asked: If Section 5 is declared unconstitutional, what should come next? 
The answer depends on precisely what the court has to say. But those who 
are fearful that a majority of justices will agree that Section 5 is 
yesterday's emergency legislation might think about the following 
question: Will Justice Anthony Kennedy (the pivotal vote) want banner 
headlines in the mainstream media that, however misleadingly, read, 
'Court declares VRA [Voting Rights Act] to be unconstitutional'? The 
'smart money,' I believe, will bet that the answer is no. And Section 5, 
in some form, will survive."

The next Voting Rights Act 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/the-next-voting-rights-act/> 
by Spencer Overton on Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:01 PM UTC: "Unfortunately, 
Hasen is helping opponents of Section 5. He gives justices allowance to 
ignore facts and law supporting Section 5, and instead perhaps think: 
Scholars anticipate our court will invalidate Section 5, so we can 
invalidate it without seeming too extreme or too political."

Delegate the oversight formula 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/delegate-the-oversight-formula/>by 
Christopher S. Elmendorf on Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:10 PM UTC: "If the 
court strikes down Section 5, Congress should re-enact it while 
delegating to the Justice Department, or a new administrative body, 
responsibility for determining which states are subject to oversight and 
which racial groups are protected in each state. The new Section 5 would 
take effect only after the agency resolves these questions."

Focus on new legislative approach 
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/30/focus-on-new-legislative-approach/>by 
Richard H. Pildes on Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 2:53 AM UTC: "If the Supreme 
Court invalidates Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, its defenders may 
be tempted to tinker at the margins and reconfigure it in a way that 
could comply with the court's decision. Given Section 5's symbolic 
status and historical importance, some will likely feel a strong pull to 
'save" it by staying within the essential framework of the current 
Section 5, while updating various details. But stepping outside the 
model of Section 5 and embracing a different legislative approach for 
national voting-rights legislation might be far more effective."

MORE TO COME...

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46784&title=If%20the%20Court%20Strikes%20Down%20Section%205%20of%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%3A%20An%20Online%20Reuters%20Symposium&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, The Voting 
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "Local Ballot Initiatives: How citizens change laws with clipboards,
    conversations, and campaigns" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46781>

Posted on January 30, 2013 4:58 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46781> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Leslie Graves of the Lucy Burns Institute sends along the following:

    I thought you might be interested in a publication we just released:
    Local Ballot Initiatives: How citizens change laws with clipboards,
    conversations, and campaigns
    <http://web1.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Local_Ballot_Initiatives:_How_citizens_change_laws_with_clipboards,_conversations,_and_campaigns>.
    It provides an overview of how individual citizens can use the
    initiative process at the local level.

    Only 24 states allow for statewide initiative and referendum, but 48
    states have at least one city that allows ballot initiatives to
    decide city issues and laws.

    In addition to the guide, we've researched the laws in each state
    and have made all of the information
    <http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_local_ballot_measures#tab=Initiative> available
    on Ballotpedia.org. People can click on their state and learn about
    the various laws and regulations that govern the local ballot
    initiative process.

    Here's the article about laws governing local ballot initiatives in
    California, for instance
    <http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_local_ballot_measures_in_California>.
    Similar information is available for every state.

    The guide is available as a free download online
    <https://www.dropbox.com/s/ge6t8zjc08rnplm/Local%20Ballot%20Initiatives.pdf>,
    and readers who want a (free) hard copy snail-mailed to them can
    contact our Director of Communications at lauren.rodgers- at --
    lucyburns.org and just ask for one.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46781&title=%E2%80%9CLocal%20Ballot%20Initiatives%3A%20How%20citizens%20change%20laws%20with%20clipboards%2C%20conversations%2C%20and%20campaigns%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in direct democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62> | 
Comments Off


    "Sen. John Kerry: We Must Address "Corrupting Force" of Money in
    Politics" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46777>

Posted on January 30, 2013 4:54 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46777> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Public Campaign blogs 
<http://publicampaign.org/blog/2013/01/30/sen-john-kerry-we-must-address-corrupting-force-money-politics>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46777&title=%E2%80%9CSen.%20John%20Kerry%3A%20We%20Must%20Address%20%E2%80%9CCorrupting%20Force%E2%80%9D%20of%20Money%20in%20Politics%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    "Obama's Flip-Flops on Money in Politics: A Brief History"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46773>

Posted on January 30, 2013 1:18 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46773> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

MUST, MUST-read Justin Elliott i 
<http://www.propublica.org/article/obamas-flip-flops-on-money-in-politics-a-brief-history>n 
ProPublica.  UPDATE:  I had missed this important piece 
<http://www.rollcall.com/news/rules_of_the_game_obamas_ethics_agenda_backfires-220898-1.html?zkPrintable=true> 
by Eliza Newlin Carney on this last week in Roll Call.

The only thing missing here are Obama calls to fix the FEC.

I was planning on writing a piece about what a disappointment the 
president has been on campaign finance issues, but Justin's piece pretty 
much covers the field.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46773&title=%E2%80%9CObama%E2%80%99s%20Flip-Flops%20on%20Money%20in%20Politics%3A%20A%20Brief%20History%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    " In the Future, Everyone Will Have a Super-PAC; Nastier campaigns,
    'laundered" donations,' untold millions: Welcome to the 2014
    elections." <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46770>

Posted on January 30, 2013 1:06 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46770> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Andy Kroll writes 
<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/super-pac-explosion-congress-president-elections> 
for Mother Jones.  He's also written Retiring Senator: Congress Doesn't 
Work Because We Fundraise Way Too Much 
<http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/tom-harkin-retire-senator-fundraise-money>,

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46770&title=%E2%80%9D%20In%20the%20Future%2C%20Everyone%20Will%20Have%20a%20Super-PAC%3B%20Nastier%20campaigns%2C%20%E2%80%98laundered%E2%80%9D%20donations%2C%E2%80%99%20untold%20millions%3A%20Welcome%20to%20the%202014%20elections.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | 
Comments Off


    Do We Need a Constitutional Amendment Expressly Protecting the Right
    to Vote? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46767>

Posted on January 30, 2013 12:19 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46767> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TAP explores. <http://prospect.org/article/making-voting-constitutional>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46767&title=Do%20We%20Need%20a%20Constitutional%20Amendment%20Expressly%20Protecting%20the%20Right%20to%20Vote%3F&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    TAP on How Opponents Defeated Minnesota ID Ballot Measure
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46764>

Posted on January 30, 2013 12:14 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46764> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Important TAP piece <https://prospect.org/article/how-vote-down-voter-id>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46764&title=TAP%20on%20How%20Opponents%20Defeated%20Minnesota%20ID%20Ballot%20Measure&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


    "GOP Electoral College Changes Going Nowhere"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46761>

Posted on January 30, 2013 11:07 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=46761> by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico reports 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/gop-electoral-vote-changes-going-nowhere-86938.html#.UQltKlbLSi1.twitter>. 
Shocking (Not!) 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2013/01/republican_plans_for_electoral_college_reform_democrats_shouldn_t_worry.html>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D46761&title=%E2%80%9CGOP%20Electoral%20College%20Changes%20Going%20Nowhere%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in electoral college <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44> | 
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130130/b9a7b4c5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SCOTUC-5-ICON.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 115159 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130130/b9a7b4c5/attachment.jpg>
-------------- 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/20130130/b9a7b4c5/attachment.png>