[EL] Pennsylvania Circulator Residency Victory (?)

[Adam Bonin]

While the PA Department of State has confirmed that it no longer believes
the in-district circulator residency requirement is constitutional and has
revised the petition forms to reflect this – see more here, including the PA
Attorney General’s letter on constitutionality
http://dos.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/information/12709/nominati
on_petitions_-_circulator_residency/1717287 -- they’ve also taken efforts to
remind candidates that the statute itself still contains this requirement,
and that if this issue is presented in Court it might be still be deemed
operative: “it remains possible that individual qualified electors may file
objections to nomination petitions in court on the basis that a circulator
does not reside in the district as required by section 909 of the Election
Code.”  I know that at the petition trainings held at the recent state
committee meetings of the PA GOP and the PA Democratic Party, the advice
provided to candidates was to not be dependent upon such signatures for
ballot access, that  the ability to have a likely constitutional victory
captioned as In re Nomination Petitions of (You) should be deemed less
alluring than surviving this process without litigation.  So we’ll see if
this actually does get litigated this cycle, and the issue finally resolved.

 

As to Richard’s post, and I know it’s been mentioned on this list before
(see
http://department-lists.uci.edu/pipermail/law-election/2013-November/008141.
html and other posts in that thread), but the 2010 Pia Varma litigation did
not regard a candidate whose sole issue was the use of out-of-district
circulators as he posits. Because Varma did not appear for her Commonwealth
Court hearing, despite proper service, the objectors only presented enough
testimony (including on the out-of-district circulators) to demonstrate she
didn’t meet the 1,000 signature threshold (having submitted 1,138).  Among
other defects, there were an additional 275 signatures that are invalid
based upon the signer (a) not being a registered voter; (b) not being a
registered Republican; or (c) not being registered to vote within the First
Congressional District – and often a combination of (a) or (b) with (c). 

 

 

Adam C. Bonin
The Law Office of Adam C. Bonin
1900 Market Street, 4th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 864-8002 (w)
(215) 701-2321 (f)
(267) 242-5014 (c)

adam at boninlaw.com

http://www.boninlaw.com <http://www.boninlaw.com/> 

 

 

 

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick
Hasen
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:40 AM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 2/23/14

 


No, Justice Thomas is Not a  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58961>
“Disgrace” 


Posted on February 23, 2014 4:30 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58961>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

I am truly puzzled by Jeffrey Toobin
<http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/02/clarence-thomas-disgr
aceful-silence.html> ’s blog post in the New Yorker, which goes after
Justice Thomas for his silence at oral argument.

Michael McGough
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-clarence-thomas-supreme-cou
rt-silence-20140221,0,1703665.story>  makes most of the salient points
rebutting Toobin. But I will just add this: Justices should be judged
primarily by their opinions. This is the place in which the Justices’ views
are translated into legal binding pronouncements, or into well thought-out
arguments that the Court has headed off in the wrong direction.

Judging Justice Thomas primarily by his opinions, there is no good argument
that Justice Thomas is a “disgrace.”  Quite the opposite. As Toobin
acknowledges, “For better or worse, Thomas has made important contributions
to the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. He has imported once outré
conservative ideas, about such issues as gun rights under the Second
Amendment and deregulation of political campaigns, into the mainstream.
Scalia wrote District of Columbia v. Heller, which restricted gun control,
and Kennedy wrote Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
<http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/05/21/120521fa_fact_toobin> , which
undermined decades of campaign-finance law, but Thomas was an intellectual
godfather of both decisions.”

Indeed, I have written an extensive analysis
<http://electionlawblog.org/archives/009463.html>  of Justice Thomas’s
leadership in conservative thinking in the campaign finance area. There is
virtually nothing Justice Thomas and I agree upon in this area. But his
ideas are respectable, and the intellectual heft in his opinions formidable.

Even if we were going to focus on oral arguments (which we should not), how
is Justice Thomas any more “disgraceful” at oral argument than Justice
Ginsburg napping
<http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/how_does_a_lady_get_any_sleep.php?page=a
ll>  or Justice Scalia deriding a litigant
<http://www.businessinsider.com/scalia-chastises-lawyer-for-reading-from-his
-notes-2014-1>  for reading his opening at oral argument?

 

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58961&title=No%2C%20Justice%20Thomas%20is%20Not%20a%20%E2%80%9CDisgrac
e%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>  


Will Justice Stevens Call for a Constitutional Amendment to Overturn
Citizens United? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58958>  


Posted on February 23, 2014 4:16 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58958>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Via Howard <http://howappealing.law.com/022214.html#055079>  comes news of a
forthcoming book from Justice Stevens, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should
Change the Constitution.
<http://www.amazon.com/Six-Amendments-Should-Change-Constitution/dp/03163737
29/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=> 

Early coverage concerns Justice Stevens’ calls to change the Second
Amendment. I am curious to see what he has to say about the First and
campaign finance (and he may have other election law issues in there too,
such as dealing with partisan gerrymandering).

I have been skeptical
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293979> of proposed
amendments to overturn Citizens United.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58958&title=Will%20Justice%20Stevens%20Call%20for%20a%20Constitutional
%20Amendment%20to%20Overturn%20Citizens%20United%3F&description=> Share

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> , Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58956> “Nowadays, people think ‘House of
Cards’ is a documentary” 


Posted on February 22, 2014 7:50 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58956>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Great Jack Pitney quote
<http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-calderon-elections-20140223,0,1296941.st
ory#axzz2u6zi1Cb2>  in LA Times on Wright, Calderon controversies.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58956&title=%E2%80%9CNowadays%2C%20people%20think%20%E2%80%98House%20o
f%20Cards%E2%80%99%20is%20a%20documentary%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59> , chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58952> “Husted: BOE can move, but locals
choose early voting site” 


Posted on February 22, 2014 6:58 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58952>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

The latest
<http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201402212113/NEWS0106
02/302210123> from Ohio.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58952&title=%E2%80%9CHusted%3A%20BOE%20can%20move%2C%20but%20locals%20
choose%20early%20voting%20site%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58950> “Where Have All the Lobbyists Gone?” 


Posted on February 22, 2014 6:57 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58950>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Lee Fang
<http://www.thenation.com/article/178460/shadow-lobbying-complex?page=full>
in The Nation:

On paper, the lobbying industry is quickly disappearing. In January, records
indicated that for a third straight year, overall spending on lobbying
decreased. Lobbyists themselves continue to deregister. In 2013, the number
of registered lobbyists dipped to 12,281, the lowest number on file since
2002.

But experts say that lobbying isn’t dying; instead, it’s simply going
underground. The problem, says American University professor James Thurber,
who has studied congressional lobbying for more than thirty years, is that
“most of what is going on in Washington is not covered” by the
lobbyist-registration system. Thurber, who is currently advising the
American Bar Association’s lobbying-reform task force, adds that his
research suggests the true number of working lobbyists is closer to 100,000.

A loophole-ridden law, poor enforcement, the development of increasingly
sophisticated strategies that enlist third-party validators and create
faux-grassroots campaigns, along with an Obama administration executive
order that gave many in the profession a disincentive to register—all of
these forces have combined to produce a near-total collapse of the system
that was designed to keep tabs on federal lobbying.

While the official figure puts the annual spending on lobbying at $3.2
billion in 2013, Thurber estimates that the industry brings in more than $9
billion a year. Other experts have made similar estimates, but no one is
sure how large the industry has become. Lee Drutman, a lobbying expert at
the Sunlight Foundation, says that at least twice as much is spent on
lobbying as is officially reported.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58950&title=%E2%80%9CWhere%20Have%20All%20the%20Lobbyists%20Gone%3F%E2
%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in legislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
, lobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58948> “Court dismisses challenge to Arizona
congressional maps” 


Posted on February 22, 2014 6:53 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58948>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

AZ Star:
<http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/court-dismisses-challenge
-to-arizona-congressional-maps/article_21fdc2eb-ea94-556d-a5db-1d5cb9b1e329.
html> 

Arizona voters have a constitutional right to wrest control of drawing
congressional boundaries from the Legislature, a federal court ruled late
Friday.

U.S. District Judge Murray Snow acknowledged the arguments by Peter Gentala,
an attorney for the Republican-controlled Legislature, that the U.S.
Constitution spells out that the “times, places and manner” of electing
members of Congress “shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature
thereof.”

UPDATE: You can find the 14 page majority opinion and four page partial
dissent embedded in this story
<http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2014/02/21/gop-lawmakers-challenge-to-az-red
istricting-commissions-existence-tossed/>  at the Arizona Capitol Times.
This case is subject to direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58948&title=%E2%80%9CCourt%20dismisses%20challenge%20to%20Arizona%20co
ngressional%20maps%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>  


Quote of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58946>  


Posted on February 22, 2014 6:48 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58946>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

“People like you, Hasen, are destroying our democracy.”

–A reader commen
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-next-citizens-united-could-b
ring-more-corruption--but-less-gridlock/2014/02/21/a190d1c6-95ab-11e3-afce-3
e7c922ef31e_allComments.html?ctab=all_&> t on my Washington Post Sunday
Outlook piece on McCutcheon, More Corruption, Less Gridlock.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-next-citizens-united-could-b
ring-more-corruption--but-less-gridlock/2014/02/21/a190d1c6-95ab-11e3-afce-3
e7c922ef31e_story.html> 

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58946&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=> Share

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> , Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58944> “Calderon indictment could affect
other races, supermajority” 


Posted on February 21, 2014 6:33 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58944>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

This CA news
<http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-calderon-indictment-could-i
mpact-other-races-supermajority-20140221,0,80263.story#axzz2u0kM7Wgw>  was
expected, but it is still BIG.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58944&title=%E2%80%9CCalderon%20indictment%20could%20affect%20other%20
races%2C%20supermajority%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in bribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54> , chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> , conflict of interest laws
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58942> “Redistricting Reform in the South” 


Posted on February 21, 2014 6:22 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58942>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

New FairVote report.
<http://www.fairvote.org/research-reports/redistricting-reform-in-the-south/
> 

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58942&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20Reform%20in%20the%20South%E2%80%9
D&description=> Share

Posted in alternative voting systems <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63> ,
redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58940> “Pennsylvania Circulator Residency
Victory” 


Posted on February 21, 2014 6:20 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58940>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Ballot Access News reports
<http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/02/pennsylvania-circulator-residency-vict
ory/> .

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58940&title=%E2%80%9CPennsylvania%20Circulator%20Residency%20Victory%E
2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in direct democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62> , petition
signature gathering <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39> , residency
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=38>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58938> “Four things the District can try to
send election turnout through the roof” 


Posted on February 21, 2014 6:18 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58938>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

Norm Ornstein
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/four-things-the-district-can-try-to-
send-election-turnout-through-the-roof/2014/02/21/6ae5efe6-9365-11e3-83b9-1f
024193bb84_story.html>  has good ideas, as always.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58938&title=%E2%80%9CFour%20things%20the%20District%20can%20try%20to%2
0send%20election%20turnout%20through%20the%20roof%E2%80%9D&description=>
Share

Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>  


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58936> “How ‘the next Citizens United’ could
bring more corruption — but less gridlock” 


Posted on February 21, 2014 11:18 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=58936>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>  

I have written this piece
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-next-citizens-united-could-b
ring-more-corruption--but-less-gridlock/2014/02/21/a190d1c6-95ab-11e3-afce-3
e7c922ef31e_story.html>  for the Sunday Outlook section of the Washington
Post. It begins:

An opinion could come as early as this coming week in the Supreme Court case
being called “the next Citizens United,” and groups concerned about the
influence of money in American politics are bracing themselves for the
result. Public Citizen has planned more than 100 events
<http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=4082>  across the
country in anticipation of a McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-case-could-give-wealth
y-donors-more-latitude-in-elections/2013/10/03/26a66d82-2ad4-11e3-b139-02981
1dbb57f_story.html>  ruling that further dismantles our campaign finance
laws and strikes down a key federal campaign contribution limit.

I, too, am troubled by the prospect of an awful decision that would clear
the way for more corruption. But I find some solace in the thought that such
a ruling could have a surprising positive side effect: reducing gridlock in
Washington.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D58936&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20%E2%80%98the%20next%20Citizens%20United%E2%
80%99%20could%20bring%20more%20corruption%20%E2%80%94%20but%20less%20gridloc
k%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  

-- 
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/20140223/7d325956/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140223/7d325956/attachment.png>