[EL] Perhaps for First Time, Justice Breyer’s McCutcheon Dissent Cites Unavailable Forthcoming Scholarship

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Sat Apr 19 10:24:21 PDT 2014


missed those tweets---i was a busy day.  Sorry!

On 4/19/14, 10:21 AM, Derek Muller wrote:
> Rick, I tweeted (the height of academic inquiry, I know--here 
> <http://twitter.com/derektmuller/status/451375319392350208> and here 
> <http://twitter.com/derektmuller/status/451376988129734656>, the 
> second with a link to a now-expired HUP page) about it when 
> /McCutcheon /was released--but, sadly, the only response was of 
> interest, not of anyone who could identify any precedent. 
> Interestingly, the HUP link identifying the forthcoming book was 
> available when /McCutcheon /was released, but it appears that HUP has 
> now moved the page to here: 
> http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674729001
>
> Another question I had is, who sent him the advance copy, and did 
> everyone on the Court get them?
>
> Derek
>
> Derek T. Muller
>
> Associate Professor of Law
>
> Pepperdine University School of Law
>
> 24255 Pacific Coast Hwy.
>
> Malibu, CA 90263
>
> +1 310-506-7058 <tel:310-506-7058>
>
> SSRN Author Page: http://ssrn.com/author=464341
>
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu 
> <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>
>
>         Perhaps for First Time, Justice Breyer’s McCutcheon Dissent
>         Cites Unavailable Forthcoming Scholarship
>         <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60645>
>
>     Posted on April 19, 2014 8:28 am
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=60645>by Rick Hasen
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
>     I was rereading /McCutcheon /last night in preparation for a
>     Monday talk at the case at the Center for the Study of Democracy
>     <http://www.democracy.uci.edu/node/25699>.  I noticed that Justice
>     Breyer cites to Robert Post’s forthcoming book on /Citizens United: /
>
>         That is also why the Court has used the phrase “subversion of
>         the political process” to describe circumstances in which
>         “[e]lected officials are influenced to act contrary to their
>         obligations of office by the prospect of financial gain to
>         themselves or infusions of money into their campaigns.”
>         /NCPAC,/ 470 U.S., at 497, 105 S.Ct. 1459.
>         <http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=1985114052&pubNum=708&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=DocumentItem&contextData=%28sc.Keycite%29>
>         See also /Federal Election Comm’n v. National Right to Work
>         Comm.,/ 459 U.S. 197, 208, 103 S.Ct. 552, 74 L.Ed.2d 364
>         (1982)
>         <http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=1982153514&pubNum=708&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=DocumentItem&contextData=%28sc.Keycite%29>
>         (the Government’s interests in preventing corruption “directly
>         implicate the integrity of our electoral process” (internal
>         quotation marks and citation omitted)). See generally R. Post,
>         Citizens Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution
>         7–16, 80–94 (forthcoming 2014) (arguing that the efficacy of
>         American democracy depends on “electoral integrity” and the
>         responsiveness of public officials to public opinion).
>
>     The book is forthcoming in June according to Amazon
>     <http://www.amazon.com/Citizens-Divided-Campaign-Constitution-Lectures/dp/0674729005/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397921007&sr=1-1&keywords=citizens+divided>,
>     based on Robert’s Tanner lectures and with responses by Pam
>     Karlan, Larry Lessig, and Frank Michelman. SSRN notes the book
>     <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2365024>, but
>     provides no draft.
>
>     Have there been any other occasions where Justices have cited
>     scholarship not available in the public record.  Justice Scalia
>     cited a forthcoming piece posted on SSRN in Heller (“And if one
>     looks beyond legal sources, “bear arms” was frequently used in
>     nonmilitary contexts. See Cramer & Olson, What Did “Bear Arms”
>     Mean in the Second Amendment?, 6 Georgetown J.L. & Pub. Pol’y
>     (forthcoming Sept. 2008), online at http://papers.
>     ssrn.com/abstract=1086176 <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1086176> (as
>     visited June 24, 2008, and available in Clerk of Court’s case
>     file) (identifying numerous nonmilitary uses of “bear arms” from
>     the founding period).”). Justice Kennedy did in Boumediene (“.
>     Thus the writ, while it would become part of the foundation of
>     liberty for the King’s subjects, was in its earliest use a
>     mechanism for securing compliance with the King’s laws. See
>     Halliday & White, The **2245 Suspension Clause: English Text,
>     Imperial Contexts, and American Implications, 94 Va. L.Rev. 575,
>     585 (2008)
>     <https://a.next.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=0338636871&pubNum=1359&originationContext=document&transitionType=DocumentItem&contextData=%28sc.Search%29#co_pp_sp_1359_585>
>     (hereinafter Halliday & White) (manuscript, at 11, online at
>     http://papers.ssrn.com/sol 3 /papers.cfm?abstract_id =1008252 (all
>     Internet materials as visited June 9, 2008, and available in Clerk
>     of Court’s case file) (noting that “conceptually the writ arose
>     from a theory of power rather than a theory of liberty”)”.)
>
>     But Justice Breyer cited to something which is not available on
>     SSRN nor is there any notation that a copy is in the Clerk of
>     Court’s file.
>
>     Is there any precedent for this?
>
>     Share
>     <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D60645&title=Perhaps%20for%20First%20Time%2C%20Justice%20Breyer%E2%80%99s%20McCutcheon%20Dissent%20Cites%20Unavailable%20Forthcoming%20Scholarship&description=>
>     Posted in 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140419/b5da0fb5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140419/b5da0fb5/attachment.png>


View list directory