[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/17/13

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jul 17 09:06:20 PDT 2013


    Justin Levitt, Mike Carvin, Luz Urbáez Weinberg Added to Today's
    Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Shelby County
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53077>

Posted on July 17, 2013 9:05 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53077> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Watch the webcast live 
<http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=6ae289b2466e2489f90d6b42c9d8d78f>beginning 
at 1 pm eastern.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53077&title=Justin%20Levitt%2C%20Mike%20Carvin%2C%20Luz%20Urb%C3%A1ez%20Weinberg%20Added%20to%20Today%E2%80%99s%20Senate%20Judiciary%20Committee%20Hearing%20on%20Shelby%20County&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting 
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off


    "Texas Defends Law on ID for Voters"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53074>

Posted on July 17, 2013 9:02 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53074> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT reports 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/us/pennsylvania-defends-law-on-id-for-voters.html?ref=politics&_r=0>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53074&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Defends%20Law%20on%20ID%20for%20Voters%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | 
Comments Off


    Is Voting Rights Act Section 2 in Constitutional Danger from the
    Supreme Court? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53071>

Posted on July 17, 2013 9:00 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53071> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Will Baude raises 
<http://www.volokh.com/2013/07/16/what-will-happen-to-section-two-of-the-voting-rights-act/> 
the question in light of /Shelby County. /I address this issue briefly 
in my APSA paper, Shelby County and the Illusion of Minimalism 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>. My bottom 
line is yes, Section 2 is in danger of being struck down as an 
unconstitutional exercise of congressional power under /Shelby County/.  
It was in danger before, and /Shelby County/ moderately increases that 
danger.  Unlike section 5, section 2 has no geographic or temporal 
limits, and further the majority might see it as not congruent and 
proportional to actual constitutional violations by states in crafting 
their district lines and other voting rules.  I plan to write more on 
this in the future.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53071&title=Is%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20Section%202%20in%20Constitutional%20Danger%20from%20the%20Supreme%20Court%3F&description=>
Posted in Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | 
Comments Off


    "IRS Chief Counsel Office Sought Information on 2010 Election
    Activity of Tea Party Applicants, House Leaders Say"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53068>

Posted on July 17, 2013 8:55 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53068> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg BNA breaking news report onthis letter 
<http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/wm_ogr_letter_to_irs.pdf>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53068&title=%E2%80%9CIRS%20Chief%20Counsel%20Office%20Sought%20Information%20on%202010%20Election%20Activity%20of%20Tea%20Party%20Applicants%2C%20House%20Leaders%20Say%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    "Judicial panel strikes down Indianapolis City-County Council
    redistricting plan" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53065>

Posted on July 17, 2013 8:51 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53065> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

IndyStar 
<http://www.indystar.com/article/20130717/NEWS/307170036/Judicial-panel-strikes-down-Indianapolis-City-County-Council-redistricting-plan>:

    A Marion Superior Court judicial panel has struck down a
    redistricting ordinance drawn up by City-County Council Republicans
    in late 2011 and signed into law by Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard
    just as Democrats took majority control of the council.The panel of
    five judges, voting along partisan lines, ruled 3-2 that the
    redistricting plan signed by Ballard, a Republican, was not properly
    drawn up under Indiana law because it was done before 2012. Indiana
    law, in a statute applying specifically to Marion County, says the
    council must redraw the 25 districts' boundaries during the second
    year after the census, which last was conducted in 2010.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53065&title=%E2%80%9CJudicial%20panel%20strikes%20down%20Indianapolis%20City-County%20Council%20redistricting%20plan%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6> | Comments Off


    "Lake County elections officials look into how woman voted twice in
    Munster" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53063>

Posted on July 17, 2013 8:46 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53063> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News 
<http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/munster/lake-county-elections-officials-look-into-how-woman-voted-twice/article_da4e36f2-417d-53e9-b317-89c609d0152a.html> 
from Indiana.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53063&title=%E2%80%9CLake%20County%20elections%20officials%20look%20into%20how%20woman%20voted%20twice%20in%20Munster%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | 
Comments Off


    Maryland Solution for DC Voting Rights?
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53058>

Posted on July 17, 2013 8:41 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53058> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A reader, Vince Treacy, writes in:

    I do have a comment on Michael Wein's proposal
    at http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53006

    The posting seems to be based on the bill reintroduced by Rep. Dana
    Rohrabacher (R-CA), "District of Columbia Voting Rights Restoration
    Act of 2013?, H.R. 299, 113th Congress, promoted by its supporters
    as retrocession-lite.

    There are three constitutional methods for providing voting rights
    for the capitol city: constitutional amendment, statehood, or
    retrocession with the consent of Maryland. I favor statehood. The
    proposal for semi-recession is not one of the constitutional means.
    It has no basis in any of the enumerated power of Congress in the
    Constitution.  It would violate numerous express provisions of the
    Constitution.

    The author supported this scheme in a posting at the Washington Post
    in January 2011 entitled "A better road to the vote: Retrocession,
    with a twist." Read it here:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions/2011/01/a_better_road_to_voting_rights.html

    He wrote: :The needed legislation involves only the constitutional
    provisions found in Article IV, Section 3, which state:

    Clause 1: 'New States may be admitted by the Congress into this
    Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the
    Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the
    Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the
    Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of
    the Congress.'

    Clause 2: 'The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all
    needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other
    Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this
    Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the
    United States, or of any particular State.'"

    Neither provision, however,  has any bearing on the proposal. Clause
    1 permits the admission of new states, subject to limitations. Since
    the proposal would not make the District of Columbia a state, or a
    part of an existing state, it does not authorize the proposal for
    semi-retrocession.

    Clause 2 grants Congress authority over territories. Since the
    District is not a territory, it has no relevance at to the District
    The District was created by Article 1, section 8, which is the sole
    source of Congress's authority over the District.

    These are legal errors. If the proposal relied only on these
    provisions, then it would have no constitutional basis. But there is
    no other apparent authority in the Constitution.

    The bill itself makes no mention of  the Territories Clause in
    Article IV. It instead relies on the District Clause , on the power
    over "Places purchased," and the authority over federal elections in
    Article I, section 4.

    The District Clause grants Congress the power "To exercise exclusive
    Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not
    exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States,
    and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of
    the United States,..." Art. I, cl.8, sec. 17 (first part). While the
    clause grants Congress plenary municipal power over the Seat of the
    Government, it provides no authority to interfere in the elections
    provisions of a sovereign state, or of any other matter beyond
    District boundaries . The one exception, the extension of diversity
    jurisdiction to the District, was sustained by a divided Supreme
    Court in a decision without a majority holding.

    Kenneth R. Thomas, CRS Report "The Constitutionality of Awarding the
    Delegate for the District of Columbia a Vote in the House of
    Representatives or the Committee of the Whole," January 24,
    2007.http://www.dcwatch.com/issues/voting070124.htm

    Another possible source may be the power to "exercise like Authority
    over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the
    State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts,
    Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Art.
    I, cl.8, sec. 17 (first part). The bill itself, in its Findings in
    section 2(2),

    The bill recites Congress's exclusive legislation over the District
    and then finds in (section 2(3) that Congress "shall exercise like
    authority" over places purchased from the states for needful
    buildings.  Since 1801, the District has never been a purchased
    place of "enclave" within Maryland or any other state. It is a
    "District" created by "Cession" for the "Seat of the Government of
    the United States" under an entirely different provision of clause 17.

    The bill also cites the power of Congress to make or alter
    regulations governing the "Time, Places and Manner" established by
    legislatures "in each State." Art. 1, sec. 4, cl. 1. While Congress
    is granted authority to supersede certain state election
    requirements, this clause gives it no authority to require a state
    to register residents of another jurisdiction who are not, and have
    never been, its citizens.

    At one time, Congress ordered states to register 18-year old persons
    for federal elections, but that provision was superseded by the 26th
    Amendment, and those persons were state citizens. Similarly, states
    have been required to register former citizens who are overseas,
    but, once again, they are citizens; this law has not yet been
    sustained by the Supreme Court.

    Even if there were any enumerated or implied power to support the
    bill (and I do not believe there is one), it would violate the
    literal terms of many express limitations on the power of Congress.

    1.         The House "shall be composed of Members chosen ... by the
    People of the several States." Art. I, sec. 2, cl. 1. The District
    is not a state, and has not been part of a state since it was
    created in 1801. Its residents therefore cannot be counted as people
    of the several states, although they are United States citizens.

    2.         House electors in each state must have "the
    Qualifications requisite for  Electors of the most numerous branch
    of the State Legislature." Art. I, sec. 2, cl. 1. The residents of
    the District do not, and cannot have, the qualifications for
    electors of the Maryland House of Delegates.

    3.         The Senate "shall be composed of two Senators from each
    State, elected by the people thereof." 17th Amd., cl. 1. With
    respect to Maryland, the residents of the District are not, and
    cannot be, "the people thereof." Senators cannot be elected from any
    area that, like the District, is not a "State."

    4.         A Representative or Senator must be, when elected, "an
    Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."  Even if
    District residents were allowed to vote, no DC inhabitant could ever
    serve as Senator or Representative. Art. I, sec. 2, cl. 2; 17th
    Amd., cl. 1. The bill (sec. 3(b)) purport to "restore" the right of
    residents of DC to "be considered inhabitants" of Maryland, but, of
    course, an express constitutional requirement cannot be eliminated
    by a mere statute.

    5.         "Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the
    Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" equal to the
    number of its Senators and Representatives. Art. II, sec. 1, cl. 2.
    In violation of this reservation of authority to the states, the
    bill would order Maryland officials to register DC residents to vote
    for presidential electors.

    6.         The Constitution requires both congressional and state
    approval for any "Agreement or Compact with another State." Art. I,
    sec. 10, cl. 4.This Clause applies to compacts between a State and
    the District (See. for example, compacts establishing Metropolitan
    Washington Area Transit Authority and Metropolitan Washington
    Airports Authority). The bill implicitly requires agreement between
    Maryland and the District over voting eligibility and procedures,
    but has no provision for votes of approval by either the
    legislatures or the people of either Maryland or the District.

    7.         The bill describes the District as an "enclave," although
    it is not a federal enclave (a term not found in the Constitution),
    but a "District" created by the Constitution as "the Seat of the
    Government" of the U.S.

    The proposed bill has been introduced in every Congress for the past
    ten years. As yet, there does not appear to be a Congressional
    Research Service Report on its constitutional issues, although any
    Member of Congress may request one.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53058&title=Maryland%20Solution%20for%20DC%20Voting%20Rights%3F&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments Off


    6th Circuit Reverses Kentucky Vote Buying Convictions for New Trial
    Because of Evidentiary Issues <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53055>

Posted on July 17, 2013 8:12 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53055> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See this opinion <http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0179p-06.pdf>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53055&title=6th%20Circuit%20Reverses%20Kentucky%20Vote%20Buying%20Convictions%20for%20New%20Trial%20Because%20of%20Evidentiary%20Issues&description=>
Posted in vote buying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=43> | Comments Off


    Jerry Goldfeder on Petitioning in NY
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53051>

Posted on July 17, 2013 7:49 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53051> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Watch 
<http://www.cityandstateny.com/look-jerry-goldfeder/#.UeRm72hQqJA.email>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53051&title=Jerry%20Goldfeder%20on%20Petitioning%20in%20NY&description=>
Posted in petition signature gathering 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39> | Comments Off


    "Miguel Estrada, Controversial Bush Court Nominee, Judges U.S.
    Supreme Court at UCI" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53046>

Posted on July 17, 2013 7:46 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53046> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The OC Weekly offers this item 
<http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2013/07/miguel_estrada_uc_irvine_law_supreme_court.php> 
on the UCI Supreme Court Term in Review event 
<http://www.law.uci.edu/events/supreme_court_term_review_2013.html> I'll 
be moderating Friday.  (For the record, I don't think anyone has called 
"Slick" Rick Hasen before---though they will now!)

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53046&title=%E2%80%9CMiguel%20Estrada%2C%20Controversial%20Bush%20Court%20Nominee%2C%20Judges%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20at%20UCI%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off


    "Cautionary Tale: Student Gets Jail Time for Stealing Online School
    Election" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53044>

Posted on July 17, 2013 7:43 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53044> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A ChapinBlog 
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2013/07/cautionary_tale_student_gets_j.php>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53044&title=%E2%80%9CCautionary%20Tale%3A%20Student%20Gets%20Jail%20Time%20for%20Stealing%20Online%20School%20Election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in internet voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=49>, voting 
technology <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40> | Comments Off


    "IRS Employees Showed No Politics, Lawmakers' Memo Shows"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53041>

Posted on July 16, 2013 4:43 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53041> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-16/irs-employees-showed-no-politics-lawmakers-memo-shows.html>: 
"Interviews with 15 U.S. Internal Revenue Service employees show no 
political motivation or White House involvement in targeting groups 
applying for tax-exempt status, House Democrats said in a memo 
<http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/MemoOnNoPoliticalTargetingAtIRS.pdf>."

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53041&title=%E2%80%9CIRS%20Employees%20Showed%20No%20Politics%2C%20Lawmakers%E2%80%99%20Memo%20Shows%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    "Statistics dominate day 2 of Pa. voter ID trial"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53038>

Posted on July 16, 2013 4:39 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53038> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP reports 
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PA_VOTER_ID_PAOL-?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>.

    That analysis showed that, as of this spring, about 511,000
    registered voters either lacked one of the PennDOT-issued IDs or
    have IDs that have expired or will expire before the Nov. 5 election.

    Siskin's testimony bolsters the plaintiffs' central claim in the
    state Commonwealth court trial that the law, one of the strictest in
    the nation, cannot be implemented without disenfranchising a large
    segment of Pennsylvania's 8.2 million voters.

    But the state's statistics expert, William Wecker, has criticized
    Siskin's research in confidential court papers, excerpts from which
    the plaintiffs' attorney displayed on a large video screen. Wecker
    said Siskin's analysis exaggerates the problem by ignoring the fact
    many voters have other acceptable IDs that are available outside of
    PennDOT, such as IDs from many universities or the armed forces. He
    also has said the research includes voters who don't require IDs
    because they vote by absentee ballots.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53038&title=%E2%80%9CStatistics%20dominate%20day%202%20of%20Pa.%20voter%20ID%20trial%E2%80%9D&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


    HuffPost Live Archived Webcast of Debate on "Dysfunctional FEC"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53035>

Posted on July 16, 2013 4:19 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53035> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Watch <http://t.co/RcxKd0oebc>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53035&title=HuffPost%20Live%20Archived%20Webcast%20of%20Debate%20on%20%E2%80%9CDysfunctional%20FEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal 
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24> | Comments Off


    "College kid steals classmates' login info, uses it to rig student
    body president election -- gets year in jail time for his trouble"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53031>

Posted on July 16, 2013 3:59 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53031> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP reports. 
<http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/student_steals_classmates_login_Wmw9AMyNI1kkjgtcnJ3yJI>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53031&title=%E2%80%9CCollege%20kid%20steals%20classmates%E2%80%99%20login%20info%2C%20uses%20it%20to%20rig%20student%20body%20president%20election%20%E2%80%93%20gets%20year%20in%20jail%20time%20for%20his%20trouble%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, voting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>, voting technology 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40> | Comments Off


    "Voting rights enforcers shift focus after Supreme Court defeat"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53028>

Posted on July 16, 2013 3:55 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53028> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Reuters reports 
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/16/us-usa-justice-voting-idUSBRE96F1AV20130716?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53028&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20rights%20enforcers%20shift%20focus%20after%20Supreme%20Court%20defeat%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Department of Justice <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>, 
Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off


    AG Holder's NAACP Speech Says DOJ VRA Enforcement to Shift to
    Section 2, Other Provisions <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53025>

Posted on July 16, 2013 2:19 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53025> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Full text of speech 
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/07/16/text-of-holder-speech-on-trayvon-martin-case/>.

He also discusses a congressional response to /Shelby County./

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53025&title=AG%20Holder%E2%80%99s%20NAACP%20Speech%20Says%20DOJ%20VRA%20Enforcement%20to%20Shift%20to%20Section%202%2C%20Other%20Provisions&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting 
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off


    "Congress Recalls Watchdog to Explain IRS Audit"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53022>

Posted on July 16, 2013 2:08 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53022> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP 
<http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/07/16/us/politics/ap-us-irs-investigation.html?ref=politics>:

    The investigator who wrote a scathing report about the Internal
    Revenue Service targeting conservative political groups is heading
    back to Capitol Hill as a key House Democrat says his committee's
    investigation has found no evidence of political bias at the agency.

    IRS inspector general J. Russell George is to testify Thursday
    before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, along
    with two IRS workers who have been interviewed as part of the
    committee's investigation.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53022&title=%E2%80%9CCongress%20Recalls%20Watchdog%20to%20Explain%20IRS%20Audit%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22> | Comments Off


    FOX News of Pa Voter ID Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53019>

Posted on July 16, 2013 1:23 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53019> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Interesting video report 
<http://video.foxnews.com/v/2547069721001/pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-gets-its-moment-in-court/?playlist_id=163737>. 
In the intro, Shepard Smith says: "Supporters say it could help prevent 
voter fraud, though frankly there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud."

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53019&title=FOX%20News%20of%20Pa%20Voter%20ID%20Case&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


    "The Senate that Senators Want" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53016>

Posted on July 16, 2013 1:09 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53016> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Monkey Cage 
<http://themonkeycage.org/2013/07/16/the-senate-that-senators-want/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+themonkeycagefeed+%28The+Monkey+Cage%29> 
guest post from Eric Schickler 
<http://polisci.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/person_detail.php?person=27> 
and Greg Wawro: <http://www.columbia.edu/%7Egjw10/>

    Events in the Senate over the past few weeks offer two clear
    lessons.  First, a simple majority in the Senate has the power --
    and indeed has long had the power -- to change how the institution
    operates.  The strategy proposed by Harry Reid -- which essentially
    duplicated the strategy proposed by Republican leader Bill Frist
    (R-TN) in 2005, which in turn echoed a strategy promoted by liberals
    in the 1950s-70s and by Republican leader Nelson Aldrich as far back
    as January 1891 -- has been available to a determined Senate
    majority at least since the nineteenth century -- as we discuss in
    our book <http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8202.html> on the
    filibuster.  The fact that the Republican minority relented in the
    nominations fight indicates that the threat of "reform by
    resolution" is real and that the Senate is not locked into its rules
    by virtue of its past institutional history.  Second, the filibuster
    persists because a majority of senators has consistently preferred a
    system in which the minority can block action to one in which a
    simple majority decides every issue.  Senators do not want their
    Chamber to become the House.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53016&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Senate%20that%20Senators%20Want%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in legislation and legislatures 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>, political parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, political polarization 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68> | Comments Off


    "The Senate didn't go nuclear. But, actually, it kind of did."
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53013>

Posted on July 16, 2013 11:53 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53013> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ezra Klein: 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/16/the-senate-didnt-go-nuclear-but-actually-it-kind-of-did/> 
"This will be the new normal. It will be the new normal under Democrats 
and then it will be the new normal under Republicans. The Senate stopped 
short of actually ending the filibuster against executive-branch 
nominations today. But the effect might well be the same."

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53013&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Senate%20didn%E2%80%99t%20go%20nuclear.%20But%2C%20actually%2C%20it%20kind%20of%20did.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in legislation and legislatures 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>, political parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, political polarization 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68> | Comments Off


    "Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Could Disenfranchise More Than 500,000
    People: Trial Expert" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53010>

Posted on July 16, 2013 10:57 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53010> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

HuffPo 
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/pennsylvania-voter-id-law_n_3605658.html?utm_hp_ref=tw>:

    A statistician testified on the second day of Pennsylvania's latest
    trial
    <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/pennsylvania-voter-id-tri_0_n_3600979.html>
    over the constitutionality of the state's voter identification law
    that hundreds of thousands of voters could be disenfranchised if the
    law is allowed to stand.

    Bernard Siskin, a statistical expert who served as a consultant for
    a variety of government agencies and companies, including the FBI,
    testified that about 511,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania lack
    the state-issued IDs required at the polls under the new law, which
    was passed last spring but has yet to be enforced.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53010&title=%E2%80%9CPennsylvania%20Voter%20ID%20Law%20Could%20Disenfranchise%20More%20Than%20500%2C000%20People%3A%20Trial%20Expert%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in voter id <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9> | Comments Off


    "The Maryland solution to D.C. voting; A neighboring state may hold
    the key to representation in Congress"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53006>

Posted on July 16, 2013 10:07 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53006> 
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Michael Wein oped 
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-dc-voting-20130711%2c0%2c4497900.story>in 
the /Baltimore Sun./

Interested to know what others think of this analysis.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53006&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Maryland%20solution%20to%20D.C.%20voting%3B%20A%20neighboring%20state%20may%20hold%20the%20key%20to%20representation%20in%20Congress%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, voting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31> | Comments Off


    Right Church, Wrong Pew Order <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53001>

Posted on July 16, 2013 9:41 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53001> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read it here 
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/SEIU-v-Husted.pdf>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D53001&title=Right%20Church%2C%20Wrong%20Pew%20Order&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
provisional ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=67>, The Voting 
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off


    "UC Irvine School of Law to Host U.S. Supreme Court Term in Review
    Program on July 19? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52998>

Posted on July 16, 2013 9:24 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52998> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See this press release 
<http://www.marketwatch.com/story/uc-irvine-school-of-law-to-host-us-supreme-court-term-in-review-program-on-july-19-2013-07-16>.  
The event will be live webcast at 12 pm Pacific on Friday.

UPDATE:  The event is SOLD OUT but will be live webcast.  I will post 
the webcast link Friday morning.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52998&title=%E2%80%9CUC%20Irvine%20School%20of%20Law%20to%20Host%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20Term%20in%20Review%20Program%20on%20July%2019%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | 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/20130717/40c8551e/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/20130717/40c8551e/attachment.png>


View list directory