[EL] more news 10/7/13

Mon Oct 7 08:09:29 PDT 2013

    Three Things to Watch for in Tomorrow's Campaign Finance Oral
    Argument at the Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55783>

Posted on October 7, 2013 8:03 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55783>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Tomorrow the Supreme Court hears argument in McCutcheon v. Federal 
Election Commission 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mccutcheon-v-federal-election-commission/>, 
concerning a First Amendment challenge to various "aggregate" or total 
limits on the amounts that individuals can give to federal candidates, 
parties, and certain committees. My /Slate/ piece 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/09/campaign_finance_at_the_supreme_court_is_mccutcheon_v_fec_the_next_citizens.html> 
lays out the issues. The Court does not have live audio or video of the 
arguments. Tomorrow there will be early reports from SCOTUSBlog 
<http://scotusblog.com> and the wire services and then more extended 
analysis from the excellent Supreme Court press corp.  A transcript will 
issue in the afternoon, and the audio should be released on Friday 
(though I don't know if that is affected by the shutdown).

Here are the three top things I'll be looking for tomorrow, to know how 
big this ruling is likely to be.

1. Do Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito believe that the Supreme 
Court's 1976 case of /Buckley v. Valeo/ is fairly in play in this case?  
As I explained in both the /Slate /piece and my /New York Times / "Room 
for Debate" contribution 
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/10/06/why-limit-political-donations/limiting-contributions-to-candidates-deters-corruption>, 
the biggest question in the case is whether the Court is going to 
jettison its rule, since 1976, applying a relatively lax level of 
scrutiny to reviewing contribution limits. This lax level of scrutiny 
has allowed most contribution limits to survive constitutional 
challenge. But Sen. McConnell and others have argued that /Buckley/ 
should be overruled on this point.  There are reasons to think that both 
Roberts and Alito have sympathy with the underlying argument to make the 
scrutiny stricter (meaning many contribution limits could be found 
constitutional).  But CJ Roberts has indicated he likes to move slowly 
in changing constitutional doctrine, and Justice Alito has been very 
careful to say he does not like overturning old precedent without full 
briefing and compelling reasons to do so.  If these justices can reach a 
result which overturns the aggregate limits without upsetting /Buckley/, 
they may be tempted to do so.

2. Is the Court ready to apply its very narrow definition of corruption 
(to be almost as narrow as bribery) which it used in the spending limit 
context in Citizens United to the contribution limit context?  There 
could be great temptation on CJ Roberts and J. Alito's part to do so.  
It would have almost the same effect as overturning /Buckley/ (meaning 
most contribution limits would be in constitutional trouble) without the 
controversial headline that the Court is overruling the settled 
precedent of /Buckley/.

3. Does the argument of the Campaign Legal Center 
<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme_court_preview/briefs-v2/12-536_appellee_amcu_clc-etal.authcheckdam.pdf>and 
others about the danger of corruption from joint fundraising committees 
gain traction?  I spelled this out in the /Slate /piece. The upshot is 
that federal officeholders will be able to collect multimillion dollar 
checks from big donors and then distribute the money to other 
candidates, parties and committees.  There's a chance Justice Kennedy, 
who saw a corruption danger in the /McConnell/ /case ///stemming from 
politicians collecting large soft money donations, also seeing a big 
corruption danger here.  J. Kennedy is a longer shot than CJ Roberts or 
Alito, but don't count him out.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55783&title=Three%20Things%20to%20Watch%20for%20in%20Tomorrow%E2%80%99s%20Campaign%20Finance%20Oral%20Argument%20at%20the%20Supreme%20Court&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    "Court Won't Hear Scruggs Appeal" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55781>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:27 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55781>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Another cert. denia 
<http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/10/07/us/politics/ap-us-supreme-court-scruggs-appeal.html?ref=politics>l 
in a bribery-related case.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55781&title=%E2%80%9CCourt%20Won%E2%80%99t%20Hear%20Scruggs%20Appeal%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in bribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>, Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Adam Winkler on the Coming "Kagan Court"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55779>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55779>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Via Slate 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/10/elena_kagan_is_the_most_influential_liberal_justice.html>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55779&title=Adam%20Winkler%20on%20the%20Coming%20%E2%80%9CKagan%20Court%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Nina Totenberg on New SCOTUS Term <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55777>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:25 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55777>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://www.npr.org/2013/10/07/229225889/despite-shutdown-supreme-court-opens-its-doors-for-new-term>, 
at NPR.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55777&title=Nina%20Totenberg%20on%20New%20SCOTUS%20Term&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Jess Bravin on New SCOTUS Term <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55775>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:24 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55775>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052702303492504579115771522857410-lMyQjAxMTAzMDAwNjEwNDYyWj.html>, 
at WSJ.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55775&title=Jess%20Bravin%20on%20New%20SCOTUS%20Term&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    "Fork In The Road: Kansas To Implement Two-Track Voter List?"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55773>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:23 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55773>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A ChapinBlog 
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2013/10/fork_in_the_road_kansas_to_imp.php>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55773&title=%E2%80%9CFork%20In%20The%20Road%3A%20Kansas%20To%20Implement%20Two-Track%20Voter%20List%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, 
The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>

    Adam Liptak on the Supreme Court's "Deep Docket"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55770>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:22 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55770>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/07/us/politics/supreme-court-has-deep-docket-in-its-new-term.html>, 
at NYT.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55770&title=Adam%20Liptak%20on%20the%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20%E2%80%9CDeep%20Docket%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Chris Geidner on the 11 Big Cases of the New SCOTUS Term
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55768>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:19 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55768>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here. 
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/13-cases-at-the-supreme-court-that-could-change-the-country>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55768&title=Chris%20Geidner%20on%20the%2011%20Big%20Cases%20of%20the%20New%20SCOTUS%20Term&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Zack Roth on CJ Roberts on McCutcheon
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55766>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:17 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55766>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/10/07/supreme-court-could-open-door-to-yet-more-money-in-politics/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55766&title=Zack%20Roth%20on%20CJ%20Roberts%20on%20McCutcheon&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    More Bauer on McCutcheon <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55764>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:16 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55764>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2013/10/on-the-eve-of-argument-the-trouble-with-the-courts-contributions-jurisprudence/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55764&title=More%20Bauer%20on%20McCutcheon&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Ruth Marcus on McCutcheon <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55762>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55762>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here. 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-eroding-the-checks-on-campaign-contributions/2013/10/06/dc158c6e-2eb9-11e3-bbed-a8a60c601153_story.html>

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55762&title=Ruth%20Marcus%20on%20McCutcheon&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Supreme Court Declines to Hear Kevin Ring Lobbyist Bribery Case,
    Tied to Abramoff Scandal <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55760>

Posted on October 7, 2013 7:14 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55760>by Rick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The order list is here 
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100713zor_5436.pdf>.

Background on the issues in Ringhere 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51836>, and in this LA Times piece 
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-court-lobbyist-20130929,0,1284244.story>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55760&title=Supreme%20Court%20Declines%20to%20Hear%20Kevin%20Ring%20Lobbyist%20Bribery%20Case%2C%20Tied%20to%20Abramoff%20Scandal&description=>

-- 
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
hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20131007/8090df56/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/20131007/8090df56/attachment.png>