[EL] What a Shock!
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Apr 9 11:47:51 PDT 2014
Jim,
If I really wanted to discourage you from commenting about my views on
the listserv, I would have removed you from the listserv, which many
people have been urging me to do for your lack of civility for some time.
(More emails to that effect came in today. A few choice quotes: "I’d
move to get rid of Jim Bopp from the list-serve. .... It’s tiresome.
He clearly can’t disagree without being disagreeable. Let him find
another forum for his snark. I’d prefer not to get any more emails from
him. And I don’t even necessarily disagree with some of his positions.
I can’t be alone in this assessment." "Just curious, is there a way to
tone down the constant snark/invective he (and many of the CCP folks)
constantly post? It is ironic because, even as a reformer, I could take
their arguments more seriously if they weren’t so obnoxious.").
Instead, despite your intemperate comments on the listserv I have
engaged with you, just like I have debated Brad Smith and Floyd Abrams
with whom I also disagree.
Rick
On 4/9/14, 10:48 AM, JBoppjr at aol.com wrote:
> Fair enough. I have no interest in long debates either but it is
> also true that these fundamentally different world views continue to
> be advocated for and currently debated.
> I thought I raised a new twist on it in my post, in response to
> yours, which is the fact that reformers regularly make dire
> predictions that almost never come true. Your post wants to hold the
> "deregulators" into account for their predictions and I was simply
> holding "reformers" to the same. Their predictions about CU were
> wrong, they should be held in account for it and as a result their
> current predictions should be viewed with more skepticism.
> But of course you and anyone is free not to defend their opinions
> if they choose. But that won't discourage me from commenting on them,
> which honestly is what I think you are trying to do. Jim Bopp
> PS And I seriously doubt that anyone would think that you would agree
> with even my non-outlandish and non-snarky statements.
> In a message dated 4/9/2014 1:16:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:
>
> Jim,
>
> We have fundamentally different world views as well as assessments
> of the empirical evidence. We have had a number of exchanges on
> the list and elsewhere over the years about these conflicting
> normative views and views of the evidence, and I don't think that
> repeating that debate on the listserv would be a good use of
> anyone's time. It is not that I don't think you are unworthy of
> debate. It is that it all has been said before. I am not sure if
> our CATO live debate from a few years ago is still on the
> Internet. I'd be happy to reprise that debate at some point in
> the future. But back and forth sniping on the listserv seems a
> waste of time.
>
> The fullest explication of my views on campaign finance appears in
> my 2003 book, /The Supreme Court and Election Law. /You can read
> the chapter on campaign finance if you want to understand my full
> views---though they have evolved in some significant ways since
> then. I am planning likely another book length treatment to make
> my full case for a political equality view of the First
> Amendment---one which differs, by the way, from Justice Breyer's
> dissent in some important ways. I hope when I can make my
> sustained argument it will convince many people who might be on
> the fence on these issues. I certainly don't expect it to
> convince you even in a book length treatment (much less in a short
> listserv response).
>
> Of course my views expressed on the blog or elsewhere are fair
> targets for you, and you can respond however you wish. The reason
> I posted a short note in response to you was that I did not want
> to leave anyone new to the list with the impression that I agreed
> with your outlandish and snarky statements. Beyond that, you have
> new lawsuits to bring (and many to win, unfortunately in my view)
> and I have a book to write.
>
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
>
> On 4/9/14, 10:03 AM, JBoppjr at aol.com wrote:
>> Well then I will await your much larger work anxiously. I
>> can raise questions about your posts and you defend yourself by
>> citing "larger works."
>> You have said repeatedly, when you occasionally respond to one of
>> my posts, that "I'm not going to get into another long debate
>> with you on the internet." I don't know if you think I am just
>> not worthy of debating you or you don't want to debate in public
>> so others can evaluate your arguments. Or perhaps you prefer just
>> to express your opinions everyday but are above defending them.
>> The Oracles of Delphi felt the same way. Either way it is an odd
>> brush off by someone with so many opinions and one who so
>> aggressively puts them out to the public. But I guess some are
>> just too good to be soiled by debate with us commoners.
>> Oh, and by the way, just because I responded I am still "not
>> going to get into another long debate with you on the internet."
>> How about a short debate instead? I have more lawsuits to work
>> on. Jim Bopp
>> In a message dated 4/9/2014 11:18:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:
>>
>> Jim,
>> I'm not going to get into another long debate with you on the
>> internet. But depending upon how one defines the problem, the
>> sky actually is already falling, and the election of Obama
>> does not prove that the system is working. I've made a
>> number of points about the problem of legislative skew in
>> this piece
>> (http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/print/article/lobbying-rent-seeking-and-constitution)
>> and I've begun work on a much larger work which will
>> eventually respond to these points.
>> Rick
>>
>> On 4/9/14, 5:55 AM, JBoppjr at aol.com wrote:
>>> Regarding Rick's comment under "What a Shock!:"
>>> /P.S. Someone should collect all the statements from the
>>> deregulationists who said getting rid of aggregate limits is
>>> no big deal and it wouldn’t lead to multi-million dollar
>>> checks and the emergence of soft money./
>>> I would but my hard drive is already full of all the Chicken
>>> Little claims of imminent doom by the campaign finance
>>> "reformers" after almost every Court decision since /Buckley/.
>>> Just to mention one, /Citizens United/ was decided in 2010.
>>> The Chicken Littles said that corporations would own all the
>>> politicians. Obama was reelected in 2012. Was he owned by
>>> corporations? Opps. And the Chicken Littles have not even
>>> apologized to Obama. They just press on with more dire
>>> predictions. Jim Bopp
>>> In a message dated 4/8/2014 11:47:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight
>>> Time, rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Edsall on McCutcheon
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60250>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 8:27 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60250>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Important NYT opinion column
>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/opinion/the-high-cost-of-free-speech.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>.
>>>
>>> Tom links to my SCOTUSBlog post, “Does the Chief Justice
>>> not Understand Politics, or Does He Understand it all
>>> too Well?
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/symposium-does-the-chief-justice-not-understand-politics-or-does-he-understand-it-all-too-well/>“
>>>
>>> It’s not every day I’m called more cynical than Richard
>>> Posner.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60250&title=Tom
>>> Edsall on McCutcheon&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60250&title=Tom%20Edsall%20on%20McCutcheon&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Miss. preparing to use new voter ID law”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60247>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 8:00 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60247>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Gannett reports.
>>> <http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20140408/NEWS01/304080033/Miss-preparing-use-new-voter-ID-law>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60247&title=“Miss.
>>> preparing to use new voter ID lawâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60247&title=%E2%80%9CMiss.%20preparing%20to%20use%20new%20voter%20ID%20law%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in election administration
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Blacks and Early Voting, in Ohio and Wisconsin”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60245>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 7:56 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60245>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> NYT letter to the editor
>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/opinion/blacks-and-early-voting-in-ohio-and-wisconsin.html?ref=opinion>
>>> from NAACP Ohio and Wisconsin leaders.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60245&title=“Blacks
>>> and Early Voting, in Ohio and Wisconsinâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60245&title=%E2%80%9CBlacks%20and%20Early%20Voting%2C%20in%20Ohio%20and%20Wisconsin%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>
>>>
>>>
>>> NYT Letters to the Editor on David Brooks McCutcheon
>>> Column <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60243>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 7:55 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60243>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Here.
>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/opinion/money-politics-and-the-justices.html?ref=opinion>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60243&title=NYT
>>> Letters to the Editor on David Brooks McCutcheon
>>> Column&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60243&title=NYT%20Letters%20to%20the%20Editor%20on%20David%20Brooks%20McCutcheon%20Column&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> How Low Will Dick Morris Go?
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60241>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 7:53 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60241>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> This low.
>>> <http://thehill.com/opinion/dick-morris/203019-dick-morris-investigate-2012-vote-fraud>
>>>
>>> Didn’t realize he was a member of the fraudulent fraud
>>> squad.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60241&title=How
>>> Low Will Dick Morris Go?&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60241&title=How%20Low%20Will%20Dick%20Morris%20Go%3F&description=>
>>> Posted in fraudulent fraud squad
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>>>
>>>
>>> What a Shock!: “John Roberts Gets the Parties
>>> Started” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60239>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 7:43 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60239>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Politico reports:
>>> <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/john-roberts-supreme-court-mccutcheon-republican-party-105503.html>
>>>
>>> Insiders are dreaming up how to maximize a recent
>>> Supreme Court ruling that frees up some big donors
>>> to give even more.
>>>
>>> A prominent idea: create a new class of donors who
>>> contribute a total of six- or seven-figures to each
>>> of three party committees and spread cash to
>>> endangered lawmakers. In exchange, the big-money
>>> givers would get something of an “all access pass”
>>> that comes with perks from the big three national
>>> committees, like face time with top officials.
>>>
>>> Of course Roberts told us that this wouldn’t happen, or
>>> that the FEC or Congress would easily fix it.
>>> Yeah right.
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/symposium-does-the-chief-justice-not-understand-politics-or-does-he-understand-it-all-too-well/>
>>> And don’t delude yourselves. Many Democratic party
>>> operatives are /delighted/ with /McCutcheon./
>>> P.S. Someone should collect all the statements from the
>>> deregulationists who said getting rid of aggregate
>>> limits is no big deal and it wouldn’t lead to
>>> multi-million dollar checks and the emergence of soft money.
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60239&title=What
>>> a Shock!: “John Roberts Gets the Parties
>>> Startedâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60239&title=What%20a%20Shock%21%3A%20%E2%80%9CJohn%20Roberts%20Gets%20the%20Parties%20Started%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> Two Panels on Voting Rights May 2 at LA Law Library
>>> as Part of Law Week
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60236>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 7:00 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60236>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Looking forward to participating in this:
>>>
>>> http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Law_Week_Flyer_Friday.png
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Law_Week_Flyer_Friday.png>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60236&title=Two
>>> Panels on Voting Rights May 2 at LA Law Library as Part
>>> of Law Week&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60236&title=Two%20Panels%20on%20Voting%20Rights%20May%202%20at%20LA%20Law%20Library%20as%20Part%20of%20Law%20Week&description=>
>>> Posted in voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>,
>>> Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Government Brief Cites McCutcheon Case In Defending
>>> FEC’s Requirements for PACs”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60234>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 6:51 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60234>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Bloomberg BNA
>>> <http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=44415475&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0e8w1u4z2&split=0>:
>>> “Supreme Court precedents, including the court’s most
>>> recent campaign finance ruling in McCutcheon v. Fed.
>>> Election Comm’n, consistently have supported
>>> requirements for public disclosure of campaign money,
>>> government attorneys argued in a brief
>>> <http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/freespeech_fec_opp_brief.pdf>
>>> filed with the high court (Free Speech v. FEC, U.S., No.
>>> 13-772, brief filed 4/4/14).”
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60234&title=“Government
>>> Brief Cites McCutcheon Case In Defending FEC’s
>>> Requirements for PACsâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60234&title=%E2%80%9CGovernment%20Brief%20Cites%20McCutcheon%20Case%20In%20Defending%20FEC%E2%80%99s%20Requirements%20for%20PACs%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “How to Clean Up American Elections”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60232>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 6:46 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60232>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Ganesh Sitaraman writes
>>> <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/04/clean-up-elections-with-peoples-pledge-105492.html#.U0SlbMeT6N8>
>>> for Politico.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60232&title=“How
>>> to Clean Up American Electionsâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60232&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20to%20Clean%20Up%20American%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “RNC chairman: Strike down all contribution limits”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60230>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 6:44 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60230>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> That’s
>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/04/08/rnc-chairman-strike-down-all-contribution-limits/>more
>>> like it.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60230&title=“RNC
>>> chairman: Strike down all contribution
>>> limitsâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60230&title=%E2%80%9CRNC%20chairman%3A%20Strike%20down%20all%20contribution%20limits%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Stay issued on subpoenas in NC election law case “
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60228>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 1:31 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60228>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> AP reports.
>>> <http://www.news-record.com/news/north_carolina_ap/article_451dc9df-0dcb-58c2-9fb5-8b87ed1d86b9.html>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60228&title=“Stay
>>> issued on subpoenas in NC election law case
>>> “&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60228&title=%E2%80%9CStay%20issued%20on%20subpoenas%20in%20NC%20election%20law%20case%20%E2%80%9C&description=>
>>> Posted in The Voting Wars
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>>>
>>>
>>> “The Hounding of Brendan Eich Gives New Cover to
>>> Defenders of Dark Money”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60226>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 1:30 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60226>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Important piece
>>> <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117307/brendan-eichs-resignation-mozilla-gives-new-cover-dark-money>
>>> from Alec MacGillis.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60226&title=“The
>>> Hounding of Brendan Eich Gives New Cover to Defenders of
>>> Dark Moneyâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60226&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Hounding%20of%20Brendan%20Eich%20Gives%20New%20Cover%20to%20Defenders%20of%20Dark%20Money%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “McConnell Doubts Individual Campaign Finance Limits
>>> Will Go Away” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60224>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 1:20 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60224>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Roll Call reports
>>> <http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/mcconnell-doubts-individual-campaign-finance-limits-will-go-away/>.
>>> I don’t think he’s the only one calling the shots on
>>> this though.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60224&title=“McConnell
>>> Doubts Individual Campaign Finance Limits Will Go
>>> Awayâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60224&title=%E2%80%9CMcConnell%20Doubts%20Individual%20Campaign%20Finance%20Limits%20Will%20Go%20Away%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> Demos Explainer on McCutcheon
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60222>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 1:03 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60222>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Guide for the Perplexed.
>>> <http://www.demos.org/publication/what-mccutcheon-v-fec>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60222&title=Demos
>>> Explainer on McCutcheon&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60222&title=Demos%20Explainer%20on%20McCutcheon&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Judge Rules Delaware Disclosure Law
>>> Unconstitutional” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60220>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 12:58 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60220>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> CCP:
>>> <http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2014/04/08/judge-rules-delaware-disclosure-law-unconstitutional/>“A
>>> federal court today issued an order
>>> <http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/SLR-Order-08apr20141.pdf>
>>> barring enforcement
>>> <http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Order-Granting-MPI.pdf>
>>> of a recently adopted Delaware law that would have
>>> forced a group that publishes non-partisan voter guides
>>> to violate its members’ privacy.”
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60220&title=“Judge
>>> Rules Delaware Disclosure Law
>>> Unconstitutionalâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60220&title=%E2%80%9CJudge%20Rules%20Delaware%20Disclosure%20Law%20Unconstitutional%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Rich People Will Always Beat Campaign Finance
>>> Restrictions” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60218>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 12:55 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60218>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Steve Chapman
>>> <http://reason.com/archives/2014/04/07/rich-people-will-always-beat-campaign-fi>writes
>>> for /Reason./
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60218&title=“Rich
>>> People Will Always Beat Campaign Finance
>>> Restrictionsâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60218&title=%E2%80%9CRich%20People%20Will%20Always%20Beat%20Campaign%20Finance%20Restrictions%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Shelby and Section 3: Pulling the Voting Rights
>>> Act’s Pocket Trigger to Protect Voting Rights after
>>> Shelby County v. Holder”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60216>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 12:51 pm
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60216>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Paul Wiley has postedthis draft student note
>>> <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2421605>
>>> on SSRN (forthcoming, /Washington and Lee Law Review/).
>>> Here is the abstract:
>>>
>>> The Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v.
>>> Holder presents voting rights advocates with a
>>> difficult challenge: finding an effective substitute
>>> for the preclearance regime struck down by the
>>> Court. The best possible alternative may live within
>>> the Voting Rights Act itself in Section 3(c)’s
>>> “pocket trigger.” Section 3(c) permits a federal
>>> court to retain jurisdiction and preclear a
>>> jurisdiction’s changes to its voting procedures upon
>>> a finding of a constitutional violation. By relating
>>> more closely to current conditions in a specific
>>> locality, Section 3(c) preclearance avoids many of
>>> the problems the Court identified in NAMUDNO and
>>> Shelby County.
>>>
>>> This Note analyzes the history of Voting Rights Act
>>> litigation and suggests a more expansive use of
>>> Section 3(c) preclearance to continue federal
>>> oversight of election procedures.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60216&title=“Shelby
>>> and Section 3: Pulling the Voting Rights Act’s Pocket
>>> Trigger to Protect Voting Rights after Shelby County
>>> v. Holderâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60216&title=%E2%80%9CShelby%20and%20Section%203%3A%20Pulling%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%E2%80%99s%20Pocket%20Trigger%20to%20Protect%20Voting%20Rights%20after%20Shelby%20County%20v.%20Holder%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>, VRAA
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=81>
>>>
>>>
>>> All My McCutcheon Commentary in One Place
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60214>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 10:47 am
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60214>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Courtesy
>>> <http://www.law.uci.edu/news/faculty/hasen_040214.html>
>>> of @UCILaw:
>>>
>>> * The Guardian
>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/08/supreme-court-fight-for-voting-rights>
>>>
>>> * Daily Journal (PDF)
>>> <http://www.law.uci.edu/news/in-the-news/2014/djournal_hasen_040814.pdf>
>>>
>>> * Reuters
>>> <http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/07/opening-the-political-money-chutes/>
>>>
>>> * SCOTUSBlog
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/symposium-does-the-chief-justice-not-understand-politics-or-does-he-understand-it-all-too-well/>
>>>
>>> * Slate <http://slate.me/1oqLlN0>
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60214&title=All
>>> My McCutcheon Commentary in One Place&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60214&title=All%20My%20McCutcheon%20Commentary%20in%20One%20Place&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> “McCutcheon and Corruption in America”
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60212>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 9:13 am
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60212>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> Harvard University Press blog
>>> <http://harvardpress.typepad.com/hup_publicity/2014/04/mccutcheon-and-corruption-in-america-zephyr-teachout.html>:
>>>
>>> In /Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin’s
>>> Snuff Box to Citizens United/
>>> <http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674050402>,
>>> Teachout reminds us that the particularly demanding
>>> notion of corruption represented by that early gifts
>>> rule is central to American law and democracy. This
>>> notion of corruption, she explains, is not limited
>>> to the blatant bribes and explicit quid pro quo to
>>> which Chief Justice Roberts referred in this week’s
>>> /McCutcheon v. FEC/
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mccutcheon-v-federal-election-commission/>
>>> ruling, and Justice Kennedy in /Citizens United/
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission/>
>>> before that. The foundational American understanding
>>> of corruption encompassed emotional, internal,
>>> psychological relationships in an effort to protect
>>> the morality of interactions between official
>>> representatives of government and private parties,
>>> foreign parties, or other politicians.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60212&title=“McCutcheon
>>> and Corruption in Americaâ€&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60212&title=%E2%80%9CMcCutcheon%20and%20Corruption%20in%20America%E2%80%9D&description=>
>>> Posted in campaign finance
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>> Marty Lederman Goes Into the Weeds on Standing and
>>> Ripeness Issues in Susan B. Anthony False Speech
>>> SCOTUS Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60210>
>>>
>>> Posted on April 8, 2014 9:00 am
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60210>by Rick Hasen
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> A very helpful primer
>>> <http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/dewine-v-dewine-with-the-united-states-somewhere-in-between/>,
>>> at SCOTUSBlog.
>>>
>>> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60210&title=Marty
>>> Lederman Goes Into the Weeds on Standing and Ripeness
>>> Issues in Susan B. Anthony False Speech SCOTUS
>>> Case&description=
>>> <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60210&title=Marty%20Lederman%20Goes%20Into%20the%20Weeds%20on%20Standing%20and%20Ripeness%20Issues%20in%20Susan%20B.%20Anthony%20False%20Speech%20SCOTUS%20Case&description=>
>>> Posted in campaigns
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court
>>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
>>> http://electionlawblog.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
>> http://electionlawblog.org
>>
>
> --
> 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://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
> http://electionlawblog.org
>
--
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://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/20140409/d516c014/attachment.html>
View list directory