[EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/3/14
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Nov 3 11:37:26 PST 2014
Sorry Brad. I'm too busy to have this debate with you now, although I
strongly disagree.
Maybe after the election.
Rick
On 11/3/14, 11:33 AM, Smith, Brad wrote:
> I am very honestly quite puzzled by this statement about Ohio Supreme
> Court Justice Judy French:
>
> "One would think she would lose because of this statement:
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67731> ”‘I am a Republican and you
> should vote for me. You’re going to hear from your elected officials,
> and I see a lot of them in the crowd. Let me tell you something: The
> Ohio Supreme Court is the backstop for all those other votes you are
> going to cast. Whatever the governor does, whatever your state
> representative, your state senator does, whatever they do, we are the
> ones that will decide whether it is constitutional; we decide whether
> it’s lawful. We decide what it means, and we decide how to implement
> it in a given case. So, forget all those other votes if you don’t keep
> the Ohio Supreme Court conservative,’
>
> Let's dissect that:
> ‘I am a Republican [/true statement of fact, obviously protected
> speech, one that her supporters will trumpet to Republican and
> conservative audiences/] and you should vote for me. [/Reasonable
> pitch from a candidate for elected office/] You’re going to hear from
> your elected officials, and I see a lot of them in the crowd. [/No
> reason to doubt her here/] Let me tell you something: The Ohio Supreme
> Court is the backstop for all those other votes you are going to
> cast. Whatever the governor does, whatever your state representative,
> your state senator does, whatever they do, we are the ones that will
> decide whether it is constitutional; we decide whether it’s lawful. We
> decide what it means, and we decide how to implement it in a given
> case. [/All true. Typically arguments made in Presidential campaigns
> by both parties and their supporters about the federal courts. see
> e.g.
> //http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Next-president-will-shape-Supreme-Court-3264700.php/]//So,
> forget all those other votes if you don’t keep the Ohio Supreme Court
> conservative,’ [/Reasonable pitch for candidate for elective office,
> clearly protected speech, argument her supporters undoubtedly are
> making while her opponent and his supporters argue for a more liberal
> justice on the Court, e.g.
> /http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/10/11/supreme-court-kennedy-odonnell/17096073/ ("We
> support O'Donnell for a second Democratic voice on the state's top
> court.")]
>
> I really am at a total loss to see what is objectionable here. French
> makes no promises regarding any future case or litigant. She makes no
> promises to rule for or against any particular class of litigants. She
> states quite clearly that judicial philosophy matters, and that
> conservatives should vote for judges with conservative judicial
> philosophies, for which Republican membership is a pretty good proxy
> (attend a Federalist Society meeting). I would assume most people who
> are going to vote against her believe that liberals should vote for
> judges with a liberal judicial philosophy, for which Democratic party
> membership is a reasonably good proxy (attend an American Constitution
> Society meeting).
>
> This strikes me as one of the most benign - and concise and relatively
> helpful - statements a judicial candidate might make to typical
> voters, who pay little attention to judicial races. It is certainly
> better than arguing that your opponent is on the take, or supports
> child molesters.
>
> Isn't her opponent O'Donnell's campaign much worse? It largely
> consists of arguing that Justice French is on the take and is bribed
> by campaign contributions.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV4ApKnhlkQ&feature=youtu.be. . If
> you are worried about confidence in the judiciary, which is worse? An
> open statement by a candidate that she is Republican, that the courts
> matter, and that if you want Republican legislators, you should also
> want a conservative court? Or Judge O'Donnell's smear ad? This guilt
> by innuendo smear has, in fact, earned a rebuke from the Ohio State
> Bar.
> http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2014/11/01/Race-for-Ohio-Supreme-Court-turns-negative.html(for
> those not from Ohio, there is a long tradition in the state of the Bar
> - which unlike some states, is not a state agency or compulsory) from
> issuing statements on judicial ads that are deemed to cross
> appropriate boundaries.
>
> Judicial elections, love 'em or hate 'em, would be a lot better if
> candidates campaigned more like Justice French and less like Judge
> O'Donnell. Far from being a reason why French should lose, I consider
> her statement a reason why she should win, and not because I am
> conservative but because I think a straightforward discussion of the
> importance of judicial ideology, without committing oneself vis any
> future litigation or litigants, is exactly how judges should campaign
> for office.
>
>
> /Bradley A. Smith/
>
> /Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault/
>
> / Professor of Law/
>
> /Capital University Law School/
>
> /303 E. Broad St./
>
> /Columbus, OH 43215/
>
> /614.236.6317/
>
> /http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Rick
> Hasen [rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> *Sent:* Monday, November 03, 2014 10:32 AM
> *To:* law-election at UCI.edu
> *Subject:* [EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/3/14
>
>
> “Amicus: Ballot-Box Special; Dahlia Lithwick unpacks some of the
> voting problems we’ll hear about in the final days of election
> season.” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67851>
>
> Posted onNovember 3, 2014 7:23 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67851>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> This week on Amicus
> <http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/amicus/2014/11/dahlia_lithwick_unpacks_some_of_the_voting_problems_we_ll_hear_about_in.html>:
> a pre-election special. Dahlia sits down with University of
> California–Irvine law professor Rick Hasen, founder of the Election
> Law Blog <http://electionlawblog.org/>, to survey the landscape of
> state voter ID laws. They consider the effect of recent headlines on
> voters’ confidence in elections, as well as the enduring curiosity of
> judicial elections in America.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67851&title=%E2%80%9CAmicus%3A%20Ballot-Box%20Special%3B%20Dahlia%20Lithwick%20unpacks%20some%20of%20the%20voting%20problems%20we%E2%80%99ll%20hear%20about%20in%20the%20final%20days%20of%20election%20season.%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> Voter Suppression Backlash: “Activists Against Voter Restrictions
> May Be Hindering Their Legal Case”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67849>
>
> Posted onNovember 3, 2014 7:20 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67849>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> More Pam Fessler
> <http://www.npr.org/2014/10/31/360300866/activists-against-voter-restrictions-may-be-hindering-their-own-cause?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social>on
> backlash:
>
> RENEE MONTAGNE, HOST:
>
> Here’s an irony of this fall’s election. New voter ID laws and
> other restrictions are in effect.
>
> STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
>
> Critics say the laws are meant to suppress voter turnout among
> minorities and the poor. In fact, Democrats have used this issue
> to motivate people to go to the polls.
>
> MONTAGNE: And when they succeed in getting people to overcome
> restrictions and vote, they create evidence that the laws don’t
> stop qualified people from voting. NPR’s Pam Fessler reports.
>
> The backlash idea is not new—I discuss it in detail in Chapter 3 of
> (the 2012 book)/The Voting Wars/. And it is worth remembering Janai
> Nelson’s words <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=45157>about
> backlash: “Despite suggestions that voter suppression tactics can
> trigger a ‘backlash’ increase in minority voter turnout, these tactics
> nonetheless violate the VRA‘s core principle—to ensure that the race
> of a voter has no bearing on her ability to vote. Moreover, the
> “backlash effect” does not negate the increased burden placed on
> minorities‘ right to vote even if, ultimately and intermittently,
> minority voters can bear it and win.”
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67849&title=Voter%20Suppression%20Backlash%3A%20%E2%80%9CActivists%20Against%20Voter%20Restrictions%20May%20Be%20Hindering%20Their%20Legal%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> Bauer on Hasen and Lithwick on Judicial Elections
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67847>
>
> Posted onNovember 3, 2014 7:13 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67847>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bauer
> <http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2014/11/different-complaints-judicial-politics/>:
>
> A solid case can be made that judges should not be picked in
> elections because forcing them to become candidates, and to
> campaign, taxes confidence in the courts. But many judges are
> picked by election and then the question becomes how much to
> bemoan, as do Rick Hasen and Dahlia Lithwick
> <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/judicial_election_outrageous_ads_campaign_contributions_break_records.html>,
> the predictably aggressive campaigning that these candidates,
> their allies and their opponents may adopt to win. Campaigns are
> campaigns, and it is not easy to sort out which particular set of
> rules or standards should apply only to judicial contests.
> Expectations may well be different for judges, encapsulated in a
> sense that they should be above the political fray, but once they
> become candidates and are thrust into the middle of political
> contention, are those expectations realistic?
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67847&title=Bauer%20on%20Hasen%20and%20Lithwick%20on%20Judicial%20Elections&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial
> elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> “ISPS Special Event: SHOW ME THE MONEY: How Transparency in
> Political Donations Could Change American Elections”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67845>
>
> Posted onNovember 3, 2014 7:11 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67845>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Great
> event<http://isps.yale.edu/events/2014/10/isps-special-event-show-me-the-money#.VFea_lPF_Z6>and
> lineup Nov. 10 at Yale.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67845&title=%E2%80%9CISPS%20Special%20Event%3A%20SHOW%20ME%20THE%20MONEY%3A%20How%20Transparency%20in%20Political%20Donations%20Could%20Change%20American%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
> “Megadonations Follow Randa Ruling in Wisconsin”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67843>
>
> Posted onNovember 3, 2014 7:09 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67843>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Brendan Fischer blogs
> <http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/11/12651/megadonations-follow-randa-ruling-wisconsin>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67843&title=%E2%80%9CMegadonations%20Follow%20Randa%20Ruling%20in%20Wisconsin%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
> “Voting rules, from photo ID to provisional ballots”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67841>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 8:03 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67841>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP reports
> <http://www.kentucky.com/2014/11/02/3515121/voting-rules-from-photo-id-to.html>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67841&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20rules%2C%20from%20photo%20ID%20to%20provisional%20ballots%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “Record-breaking ‘Souls to Polls’ turnouts Sunday in South
> Florida” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67839>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:57 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67839>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Palm Beach Post reports
> <http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/democrats-hoping-final-souls-to-the-polls-events-s/nhyD7/>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67839&title=%E2%80%9CRecord-breaking%20%E2%80%98Souls%20to%20Polls%E2%80%99%20turnouts%20Sunday%20in%20South%20Florida%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voting
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
>
>
> What to Expect When You’re Electing: Here’s What I’ll Be Watching
> for Tuesday <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67836>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:54 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67836>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Unless there is some natural or human-made disaster or a massive
> electronic voting problem somewhere, election day itself likely will
> be relatively quiet. No doubt we will hear reports about votes being
> ‘flipped” by electronic voting machines because of calibration error,
> random stories of long lines (though I expect this to be far less of a
> problem than on presidential election days, where turnout is much
> higher). If there are long lines, expect there to be calls to keep
> polls open, and potentially even a lawsuit filed here or there (and no
> doubt opposed) to extend polling times.
>
> The real action will come in the evening as the polls close. There
> will be delays in some places with reporting of votes, which will lead
> some people to suspect some kind of chicanery (especially if the late
> reporting areas are from one’s opposing party). Only later in the
> evening (or the following morning) will it become clear enough if an
> election is within themargin of litigation
> <http://ssrn.com/abstract=698201>.
>
> To be close enough to go to a recount or litigation, generally we are
> talking votes within the hundreds or less (or perhaps a few thousand
> in a larger jurisdiction). That could happen anywhere. I fear it most
> happening in the Florida governor’s race—not only because of Florida’s
> politicized electoral system. Thanks to changes after 2000, the
> Secretary of State is a political appointee of the governor. A recipe
> for disaster.
>
> Next I fear a contested gubernatorial election in Wisconsin. The state
> administers elections much better than Florida does, but there is
> still considerable variation and in some places administration is
> weaker than others (I openedThe Voting Wars
> <http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=9780300182033>with
> Kathy Nicholas and those suddenly found votes in Waukesha County.)
>
> Things will also get heated if control of the Senate is in play—if
> Alaska is late with the counting, if La. and/or Ga. go to a runoff.
>
> In that case, expect members of the fraudulent fraud squad to point to
> voter fraud as behind any Democratic victory, especially in Colorado.
> Expect Democrats to complain of voter suppression in Texas and beyond.
>
> All we are left to do at this point is to utter theElection
> Administrator’s prayer
> <http://politicaldictionary.com/words/election-administrators-prayer/>.
>
> (title of post courtesy ofStephen Colbert
> <http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/qtoavw/what-to-expect-when-you-re-electing>.)
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67836&title=What%20to%20Expect%20When%20You%E2%80%99re%20Electing%3A%20Here%E2%80%99s%20What%20I%E2%80%99ll%20Be%20Watching%20for%20Tuesday&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “Cancel the Midterms” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67834>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:29 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67834>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> David Schanzer and Jay SullivanNYT oped
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/opinion/cancel-the-midterms.html?ref=opinion>.
> “ The government should, through a constitutional amendment, extend
> the term of House members to four years and adjust the term of
> senators to either four or eight years, so that all elected federal
> officials would be chosen during presidential election years. Doing so
> would relieve some (though, of course, not all) of the systemic
> gridlock afflicting the federal government and provide members of
> Congress with the ability to focus more time and energy on governance
> instead of electioneering.”
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67834&title=%E2%80%9CCancel%20the%20Midterms%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
>
>
> “Money and Judges, a Bad Mix” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67832>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:14 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67832>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT editorial.
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/opinion/money-and-judges-a-bad-mix.html?ref=politics>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67832&title=%E2%80%9CMoney%20and%20Judges%2C%20a%20Bad%20Mix%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial elections
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> “Punch Line With Real Political Punch; Bill Maher ‘Flip a
> District’ Campaign to End on Election Day”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67830>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:12 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67830>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bill Carter reports
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/business/media/bill-maher-flip-a-district-campaign-to-end-on-election-day.html?ref=politics>for
> NYT.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67830&title=%E2%80%9CPunch%20Line%20With%20Real%20Political%20Punch%3B%20Bill%20Maher%20%E2%80%98Flip%20a%20District%E2%80%99%20Campaign%20to%20End%20on%20Election%20Day%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
>
>
> “Montana Judicial Race Joins Big-Money Fray”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67828>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:09 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67828>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT reports
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/us/montana-judicial-race-joins-big-money-fray.html?ref=politics>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67828&title=%E2%80%9CMontana%20Judicial%20Race%20Joins%20Big-Money%20Fray%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial elections
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> “A Flood of Late Spending on Midterm Elections, From Murky
> Sources” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67826>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:08 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67826>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> NYT’s Nick Confessore and Derek Willis:
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/us/politics/a-flood-of-late-spending-on-midterm-elections-from-murky-sources.html?ref=politics&_r=0>
>
> A stealthy coterie of difficult-to-trace outside groups is
> slipping tens of millions of dollars of attacks ads and negative
> automated telephone calls into the final days of the midterm
> campaign, helping fuel an unprecedented surge of last-minute
> spending on Senate races.
>
> Much of the advertising is being timed to ensure that no voter
> will know who is paying for it until after the election on
> Tuesday. Some of the groups are “super PACs
> <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>”
> that did not exist before Labor Day but have since spent heavily
> on political advertising, adding to the volatility of close Senate
> and House races.
>
> Others formed earlier in the year but remained dormant until
> recently, reporting few or no contributions in recent filings with
> the Federal Election Commission <http://www.fec.gov/>, only to
> unleash six- and seven-figure advertising campaigns as Election
> Day draws near. Yet more spending is coming from nonprofit
> organizations with bland names that have popped up in recent weeks
> but appear to have no life beyond being a conduit for the ads.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67826&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Flood%20of%20Late%20Spending%20on%20Midterm%20Elections%2C%20From%20Murky%20Sources%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
> “McFadden alleges illegal coordination between Franken,
> Bloomberg’s PAC” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67824>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:06 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67824>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP reports. <http://www.startribune.com/local/281242211.html>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67824&title=%E2%80%9CMcFadden%20alleges%20illegal%20coordination%20between%20Franken%2C%20Bloomberg%E2%80%99s%20PAC%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
>
> “Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections? A reply to our critics.”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67822>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:04 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67822>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jesse Richman and Dave Earnest
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/11/02/do-non-citizens-vote-in-u-s-elections-a-reply-to-our-critics/>:
>
> Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections? Our blog post
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/> and
> article <http://ww2.odu.edu/%7Ejrichman/NonCitizenVote.pdf> on
> non-citizen voting have reached a wide audience, and have
> motivated several efforts to dispute our methods and conclusions.
> Although the criticisms of our work speak to the inherent
> difficulty of studying individuals who face strong pressures to
> misrepresent their behaviors, we maintain that our data is the
> best currently available to answer the question and stand by our
> finding that some non-citizens have voted in recent elections….
>
> In both our article and blog post we have acknowledged the
> limitations of our analysis. We continue to welcome criticisms of
> our methodology and attempts to validate, replicate or refute our
> study. Knowledge emerges from debate, dialogue and critical
> examination of findings—processes that are intrinsically
> contentious. We trust that our colleagues share our appreciation
> of the value of this debate — and more importantly, of our
> willingness to engage in it.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67822&title=%E2%80%9CDo%20non-citizens%20vote%20in%20U.S.%20elections%3F%20A%20reply%20to%20our%20critics.%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
>
>
> “In Alabama, race again at heart of voting rights debate — but
> with twist” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67820>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:00 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67820>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Bob Barnes
> preview<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/in-alabama-race-again-at-heart-of-voting--rights-debate--but-with-twist/2014/11/02/568409b8-5f69-11e4-9f3a-7e28799e0549_story.html>of
> the Alabama SCOTUS redistricting case.
>
> My preview of the case for SCOTUSBlogis here
> <http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/argument-preview-racial-gerrymandering-partisan-politics-and-the-future-of-the-voting-rights-act/>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67820&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Alabama%2C%20race%20again%20at%20heart%20of%20voting%20rights%20debate%20%E2%80%94%20but%20with%20twist%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
>
>
> Senator Rand Paul: Shhh About Voter ID!
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67818>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 6:56 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67818>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Think Progress
> <http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/11/02/3587580/rand-paul-supports-voter-id-laws-but-says-republicans-shouldnt-campaign-on-it/>; “I’m
> not really opposed to [voter ID laws]. I am opposed to it as a
> campaign theme,” Paul told CBS’ /Face the Nation/ host Bob Schieffer.
> “Republicans, if you want to get African American votes, they think
> that this is suppression somehow and it’s a terrible thing.”
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67818&title=Senator%20Rand%20Paul%3A%20Shhh%20About%20Voter%20ID%21&description=>
> Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
>
>
> North Carolina Voter Suppression Backfire?
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67816>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 6:53 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67816>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Back in July 2013,I
> wrote<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/24/will-the-gop-s-north-carolina-end-run-backfire.html>at
> The Daily Beast: “There is good reason to think, however, that there
> will be a strong reaction from Democrats, minority voters, and
> voting-rights activists if this law passes. Litigation to bar paid
> voter-registration drives will probably be struck down. Activists will
> spend considerable energy seeking to negate the effects of these laws
> and to increase turnout. In addition, a law such as House Bill 589
> will energize Democrats. As I’ve argued
> <http://www.amazon.com/The-Voting-Wars-Election-Meltdown/dp/0300198248/ref=as_at?tag=thedailybeast-autotag-20&linkCode=as2&ie=UTF8&qid=1329286945&sr=1-2-catcorr>,
> voter-suppression efforts often backfire, perhaps increasing
> fundraising and turnout on the left. The bill gives Democrats a great
> cause to rally around in North Carolina even as they will spend
> significant resources fighting the restrictions.”
>
> Today’s WUNC
> <http://wunc.org/post/more-people-vote-early-last-mid-term-election>:
> “More North Carolina voters cast their ballots early this year than
> did in the last mid-term elections, according to State Board of
> Elections figures released Sunday. A new election law limited the
> number of early voting days but increased the total hours….Here are
> three possible causes for the increased turn-out: Liberal groups may
> have been energized to mobilize voters in response to the law passed
> by the Republican-controlled General Assembly in 2013, reducing the
> number of days but increasing the number of hours for early voting,
> said N.C. State University Political Science Professor Andrew
> Taylor….Early voting is popular (more than half of voters voted early
> in 2012 and about a third of voters did in 2010) and may be continuing
> to become popular, Taylor said. The increase could be a result of
> increased voter interest in the high-profile and competitive U.S.
> Senate race between incumbent Kay Hagan and North Carolina House
> Speaker Thom Tillis, said Catawba College Political Science Professor
> Mike Bitzer.”
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67816&title=North%20Carolina%20Voter%20Suppression%20Backfire%3F&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> Ohio Supreme Court Justice French Could Lose for the Wrong Reason
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67813>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 6:46 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67813>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> One would think she would lose because ofthis statement:
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67731> ”‘I am a Republican and you
> should vote for me. You’re going to hear from your elected officials,
> and I see a lot of them in the crowd. Let me tell you something: The
> Ohio Supreme Court is the backstop for all those other votes you are
> going to cast. Whatever the governor does, whatever your state
> representative, your state senator does, whatever they do, we are the
> ones that will decide whether it is constitutional; we decide whether
> it’s lawful. We decide what it means, and we decide how to implement
> it in a given case. So, forget all those other votes if you don’t keep
> the Ohio Supreme Court conservative,’
>
> But shemay
> lose<http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/11/01/gop-statewide-officeholders-rally-for-french-on-high-court.html>for
> a different reason: “Republicans are scared that [Democrat John P.]
> O’Donnell could pull an upset because of a tendency for voters to cast
> ballots for candidates with familiar names. An O’Donnell already sits
> on the court — Republican Terrence O’Donnell. The men are not related.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67813&title=Ohio%20Supreme%20Court%20Justice%20French%20Could%20Lose%20for%20the%20Wrong%20Reason&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial
> elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> Election conspiracy theories, an American staple”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67811>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 6:44 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67811>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> LAT oped
> <http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-uscinski-election-fraud-20141103-story.html>by Joseph
> E. Uscinski and Joseph M. Parent.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67811&title=Election%20conspiracy%20theories%2C%20an%20American%20staple%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> Ed Fitzpatrick Column on Rhode Island Voter ID Etc.
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67809>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 6:39 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67809>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Read here.
> <http://www.providencejournal.com/writers/edward-fitzpatrick/20141101-edward-fitzpatrick-epic-rhode-island-election-cycle-nears-dramatic-conclusion.ece>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67809&title=Ed%20Fitzpatrick%20Column%20on%20Rhode%20Island%20Voter%20ID%20Etc.&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> Good Example of Why Large Scale Impersonation Voter Fraud is So
> Hard to Pull Off <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67807>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 10:41 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67807>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Eventhis single case
> <http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S3607682.shtml#.VFZ6UFPF_Z5>easily
> caught.
>
> UPDATE: A few readers have pushed back on my statement that the case
> was “caught.” By this I mean that the issue came to attention of
> election officials, not that they stopped the casting of the
> fraudulent vote in time. It shows how ridiculous and boneheaded it
> would be to try to have a scheme to steal elections in this way. You
> would have to identify voters on the roll who have not yet voted in
> sufficient numbers to swing the election. You’d have to pay people to
> go into the polling places claiming to be someone else and hope,
> without the chance of verification, that they will vote the way you
> will pay them to vote. And then hope that the whole scheme never gets
> detected as those legitimate voters whose votes were fraudulently
> taken don’t show up, as in this New Mexico example, and complain that
> someone had already voted for the voter.
>
> It is no surprise that in going back to the 1980s I couldn’t find a
> single example where an election was arguably stolen with this kind of
> impersonation fraud. In contrast, i could find examples just about
> every year somewhere in the country of absentee ballot fraud schemes
> used to try to swing (sometimes successfully) an election.
>
> So if there were any real scheme in New Mexico, aside from an isolated
> incident (and this one could yet be clerical error—with a voter with a
> similar name being directed to sign the wrong line), we’d know about it.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67807&title=Good%20Example%20of%20Why%20Large%20Scale%20Impersonation%20Voter%20Fraud%20is%20So%20Hard%20to%20Pull%20Off&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “States ditch electronic voting machines”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67805>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 8:14 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67805>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The Hill reports.
> <http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/222470-states-ditch-electronic-voting-machines>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67805&title=%E2%80%9CStates%20ditch%20electronic%20voting%20machines%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voting technology
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>
>
>
> Quote of the Day-Kobach Disenfranchisement Edition
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67803>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 8:00 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67803>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> “I served for a week on a jury trial, which basically told me I
> was a registered voter. I’m a disabled veteran, so it’s
> particularly frustrating. Why should I have to prove my
> citizenship when I served in the military?”
>
> –Kansas voter De Anna Allen
> <http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article3504228.html>,
> quoted by the /Wichita Eagle./
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67803&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day-Kobach%20Disenfranchisement%20Edition&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “More than 21,000 Kansans’ voter registrations in suspense because
> of proof of citizenship” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67801>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:59 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67801>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Important
> <http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article3504228.html>/Wichita
> Eagle /analysis:
>
> The numbers of Kansans with incomplete registration because of
> citizenship are highest among the young and unaffiliated, an Eagle
> analysis found. Statewide, 12,327 people who identified as
> unaffiliated had their registrations suspended because of lack of
> proof of citizenship, compared with 4,787 who identified as
> Republicans, 3,948 who identified as Democrats and 361 who
> identified as Libertarians. Not all who applied identified a
> party, records requested by The Wichita Eagle from the state show.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67801&title=%E2%80%9CMore%20than%2021%2C000%20Kansans%E2%80%99%20voter%20registrations%20in%20suspense%20because%20of%20proof%20of%20citizenship%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inelection administration
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “Golden Week on the chopping block for Ohio Republicans and
> Democrats for years (time line)” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67799>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:37 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67799>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The /Cleveland Plain Dealer/reports.
> <http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/11/golden_week_on_the_chopping_bl.html>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67799&title=%E2%80%9CGolden%20Week%20on%20the%20chopping%20block%20for%20Ohio%20Republicans%20and%20Democrats%20for%20years%20%28time%20line%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,election
> administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “5 Voting Suppression Tactics Used Before Elections”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67797>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:30 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67797>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> AP reports
> <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/voting-suppression-tactics-elections-26635771>.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67797&title=%E2%80%9C5%20Voting%20Suppression%20Tactics%20Used%20Before%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,chicanery
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “The Unbearable Lightness of Zero Deviation”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67794>
>
> Posted onNovember 2, 2014 7:26 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67794>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> A. J. Pate, who has been involved in redistricting efforts for
> decades, has written this guest post on the question whether zero
> deviation in population for congressional districts is
> constitutionally compelled:
>
> Zero deviation and divided census tracts are the identifying
> hallmarks of a gerrymander. Achieving zero deviation is virtually
> impossible without splitting census tracts. There is no other
> justification for the practice.
>
> One of the primary goals in the quest for fair redistricting
> should be the requirement that the smallest unit to be used in
> redistricting will be the census tract.
> Census tracts are basically neighborhoods, or micro communities of
> interest. They are designed by the U. S. Bureau of the Census to
> be demographically homogeneous, relatively permanent, and bounded
> by natural and/or manmade geographical features. They are
> statistical subdivisions of counties and do not cross county lines.
> “Census tracts generally have between 1,500 and 8,000 people, with
> an optimum size of 4,000 people. Counties with fewer people have a
> single census tract. When first delineated, census tracts are
> designed to be homogeneous with respect to population
> characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The
> spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the
> density of settlement. Census tract boundaries are delineated with
> the intention of being maintained over many decades so that
> statistical comparisons can be made from decennial census to
> decennial census.“ U. S. Census Bureau,/Cartographic Boundary
> Files, Geographic Area Description, Census Tracts,/2005.
>
> Various redistricting experts, authorities, and other interested
> organizations are also calling for the use of undivided census
> tracts as the basic unit in redistricting, including: /Model
> Redistricting Act/, Section 4 (a)(6),/Redistricting Criteria/,
> issued in 2005 jointly by the Mexican American Legal Defense and
> Educational Fund, California Common Cause, the Asian Pacific
> American Legal Center, and the League of Women Voters of
> California; /A Proposal for Redistricting Reform: A Model State
> Constitutional Amendment/, Section 6.E, Americans for
> Redistricting Reform, January 2009, by Sam Hirsch, formerly of
> Jenner & Block LLP, Washington, D.C. and currently U.S. Department
> of Justice; and /Arizona State Constitution/, Article 4, Part 2,
> Section 1 (14.E), as amended by the passage of Proposition 106 by
> the people of Arizona in the 2000 general election.
>
> For those truly advocating fair redistricting, academia should
> never accept zero deviation as a norm, nor perpetuate the legal
> fiction that it is required by the U.S. Supreme Court (or worse,
> by the Constitution). Likewise, academia should never accept the
> division of census tracts as a necessary evil to achieve the goal
> of substantially equal population.
>
> Since Justice Brennan was the most zealous advocate on the Supreme
> Court of population equality in districts,/Karcher v. Daggett/is
> often cited as a requirement for achieving absolute equality
> (“zero deviation”) between congressional district populations.
> The following quotes of Justice Brennan in this case clearly
> dispel such a dogmatic misinterpretation of the Court’s opinion.
> In fact, the phrase “zero deviation” occurs only twice in Court
> opinions, one occurrence being in a footnote by Justice Stevens
> and the other disclaiming its necessity by Justice O’Connor,
> neither instance being the Opinion of the Court. It has never
> been a requirement of the Court.
>
> Opinion of the Court, Justice Brennan: “Any number of
> consistently applied legislative policies might justify some
> variance, including, for instance, making districts compact,
> respecting municipal boundaries, preserving the cores of prior
> districts, and avoiding contests between incumbent
> Representatives. As long as the criteria are nondiscriminatory,
> these are all legitimate objectives that, on a proper showing,
> could justify minor population deviations.” [Citations omitted.]
> /Karcher v. Daggett/, 462 U.S. 725, at 740-1 (1983). Justice
> Brennan also stated in Footnote 6, “A federal principle of
> population equality does not prevent any State from taking steps
> to inhibit gerrymandering, so long as a good faith effort is made
> to achieve population equality as well./See, e.g.,/Colo. Const.
> Art. V, § 47 (guidelines as to compactness, contiguity, boundaries
> of political subdivisions, and communities of interest);
> Mass.Const., Amended Art. CI, 1 (boundaries); N.Y.Elec.Law
> 4-100(2) (McKinney 1978) (compactness and boundaries).” He
> further stated in Footnote 11, “The very cases on
> which/Kirkpatrick/relied made clear that the principle of
> population equality did not entirely preclude small deviations
> caused by adherence to consistent state policies.”
>
> Justice Stevens, concurring: “The major shortcoming of the
> numerical standard is its failure to take account of other
> relevant — indeed, more important — criteria relating to the
> fairness of group participation in the political process. To that
> extent, it may indeed be counterproductive.”/Karcher v. Daggett/,
> 462 U. S. 725, at 753 (1983).
>
> Justice Powell, with whom Justice Stevens joined, concurring in
> part and dissenting in part: “A standard that judges the
> constitutionality of a districting plan solely by reference to the
> doctrine of `one person, one vote’ may cause two detrimental
> results. First, as a perceived way to avoid litigation,
> legislative bodies may place undue emphasis on mathematical
> exactitude, subordinating or ignoring entirely other criteria that
> bear directly on the fairness of redistricting. Second, as this
> case illustrates, and as/Reynolds v. Sims/anticipated, exclusive
> or primary reliance on `one person, one vote’ can betray the
> constitutional promise of fair and effective representation by
> enabling a legislature to engage intentionally in clearly
> discriminatory gerrymandering.” [Citations omitted.] /Davis v.
> Bandemer/, 478 U.S. 109, at 168 (1986).
>
> Justice Harlan, with whom Justice Stewart joined, dissenting:
> “[T]he Court’s exclusive concentration upon arithmetic blinds it
> to the realities of the political process, as the/Rockefeller/case
> makes so clear. The fact of the matter is that the rule of
> absolute equality is perfectly compatible with `gerrymandering’ of
> the worst sort. A computer may grind out district lines which can
> totally frustrate the popular will on an overwhelming number of
> critical issues. The legislature must do more than satisfy one
> man, one vote; it must create a structure which will, in fact, as
> well as theory be responsive to the sentiments of the community.”
> /Wells v. Rockefeller/, 394 U.S. 542, at 551 (1969).
> Justice Harlan, in/Kirkpatrick v. Preisler/, 392 U.S. at 550-552
> (1969), ridiculed the concept: “Marching to the nonexistent
> ‘command of Art. I, Sec. 2’ of the Constitution, the Court now
> transforms a political slogan into a constitutional absolute.
> Strait indeed is the path of the righteous legislator. Slide rule
> in hand, he must avoid all thought of county lines, local
> traditions, politics, history, and economics, so as to achieve the
> magic formula: one man, one vote. … If the Court believes it has
> struck a blow today for fully responsive representative democracy,
> it is sorely mistaken. Even more than in the past, district lines
> are likely to be drawn to maximize the political advantage of the
> party temporarily dominant in public affairs. … [T]he question
> before us is whether the Constitution requires that mathematics be
> a substitute for common sense in the art of statecraft.” Justice
> White, in/Kirkpatrick v. Preisler/, 394 U.S. at 555 (1969), wrote:
> “Today’s decisions, on the one hand, require precise adherence to
> admittedly inexact census figures, and, on the other, downgrade a
> restraint on a far greater potential threat to equality of
> representation, the gerrymander. … I see little merit in such a
> confusion of priorities.”
> The prescient warnings of Justices Powell and Harlan and others
> have been fully realized; extreme adherence to zero deviation has
> led inexorably to extreme gerrymandering (/summum ius summa iniuria/).
> The Court had strained at a gnat, and swallowed a gerrymander.
> The U. S. Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that the Constitution
> does not require absolute equality in district populations,
> apparently in a unanimous vote. “We have since explained that the
> ‘as nearly as is practicable’ standard does not require that
> congressional districts be drawn with ‘precise mathematical
> equality.’” /Tennant v. Jefferson County Commission/, 567 U.S. ___
> (2012) (/per curiam/). The Court made it clear that a plan could
> not be challenged successfully simply because an alternative plan
> achieved a lower variance of population. And despite such
> allowances by the Court, gerrymanderers will continue to use zero
> deviation as a cover to gain personal and/or partisan political power.
> For unreconstructed proponents of zero deviation or those who may
> doubt the Court’s intention, the challenge is to cite a case where
> the Supreme Court has held a redistricting plan illegal or
> unconstitutional due to relatively minor population variances when
> a state had consistently followed fair redistricting principles.
> The redistricting standards in Iowa apparently allow for a total
> deviation of two percent. “Congressional districts shall each have
> a population as nearly equal as practicable to the ideal district
> population . . . No congressional district shall have a
> population which varies by more than one percent from the
> applicable ideal district population . . .” Iowa Code, Chapter
> 42.4 (1.b).
>
> “[P]opulation equality is such a crude way of equalizing voters
> that an obsession with very small population deviations seems
> rather silly.” Bruce Cain,/The Reapportionment Puzzle,/(1984), p.
> 59. As quoted by the Supreme Court of California,/Wilson v. Eu/, 1
> Cal.4th 707, at 754, footnote 12 (1992).
>
> Zero population deviation is a/reductio ad absurdum/. There is no
> perfect census, which is changing even as it is being taken,
> through births, deaths, and migrations. Plans are not drawn until
> a year or more after the census, and elections are held two or
> more years after. Districts are based on total population in a
> futile quest for equally–weighted votes, arguably the worst basis
> to use for such an impossible goal. The Court had placed an
> inordinate reliance on such an illogically simplistic and
> internally contradictory standard.
>
> With a goal of fair and effective representation, there should be
> a cohesive approach to respect communities of interest based on a
> strict use of whole census tracts as neighborhood/micro
> communities of interest, and, to the extent practicable, use of
> counties as intermediate/historical communities of interest, and
> councils of governments as regional/macro communities of
> interest. These are perfectly nested communities — census tracts
> do not cross county lines, and councils of governments are
> composed of whole counties.
>
> The optimal use of coterminous boundaries and nesting of various
> types of districts will increase the opportunity for upward
> mobility of politicians and thus competition (“the rivalship of
> power”, as Hamilton noted in/The Federalist/No. 84). Coherent
> functionally-compact districts are certainly more capable of
> mutability or of becoming more competitive than fragmented
> artificial districts. Elections will be considerably more
> responsive to broad political shifts within communities of
> interest. Representation will be enhanced by competition over who
> will best represent the interests of the community.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67794&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Unbearable%20Lightness%20of%20Zero%20Deviation%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
>
>
> Interview with Dahlia Lithwick: “Amicus: Ballot Box Special”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67792>
>
> Posted onNovember 1, 2014 11:40 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67792>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Inthis
> podcast,<http://slateamicus.slate.libsynpro.com/amicus-ballot-box-special>I
> sit down with Dahlia Lithwick to talk about the bubbling election law
> disputes, including four which made it to the Supreme Court such as
> Texas’s controversial voter id case.
>
> And here’s more information about Dahlia’sregular “Amicus”
> podcast<http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/amicus.html>and the
> first four episodes:
>
> *
>
>
> Amicus: Ballot-Box Special
> <http://slateamicus.slate.libsynpro.com/amicus-ballot-box-special>
>
>
> Posted: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:16:56 +0000
>
> Play Now
> <http://www.podtrac.net/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/slateamicus/2014-11-01-Amicus-004.mp3>
>
> On Ep. 4 of Amicus, a pre-election special. Dahlia sits down with
> UC Irvine law professor Rick Hasen, founder of Election Law Blog,
> to survey the landscape of state voter ID laws. They consider the
> effect of recent headlines on voters’ confidence in elections, as
> well as the enduring curiosity of judicial elections in America.
>
> *
>
>
> Amicus: Revenge of the Octogenarians
> <http://slateamicus.slate.libsynpro.com/amicus-revenge-of-the-octogenarian>
>
>
> Posted: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 18:32:02 +0000
>
> Play Now
> <http://www.podtrac.net/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/slateamicus/2014-10-25-Amicus-003.mp3>
>
> On Ep. 3 of Amicus, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick talks with the New
> Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin about his recent interview with President
> Obama on Obama’s judicial legacy. Then Dahlia welcomes Roberta
> Kaplan, the lawyer who won last year’s DOMA case U.S. vs. Windsor,
> and who’s now fighting for same-sex marriage in the South.
>
> *
>
>
> Amicus: Let’s Salsa with Sotomayor
> <http://slateamicus.slate.libsynpro.com/amicus-lets-salsa-with-sotomayor>
>
>
> Posted: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 06:42:15 +0000
>
> Play Now
> <http://www.podtrac.net/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/slateamicus/2014-10-18-Amicus-002.mp3>
>
> On Ep. 2 of Amicus, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick and former acting
> solicitor general Walter Dellinger discuss the Surpreme Court’s
> recent non-decisions about abortion and voter I.D. laws. Then
> Dahlia talks with Joan Biskupic, author of a new biography of
> Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
>
> *
>
>
> Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick
> <http://www.podtrac.net/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/slateamicus/2014-10-11-Amicus-001.mp3>
>
>
> Posted: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 05:14:11 +0000
>
> Play Now
> <http://www.podtrac.net/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/slateamicus/2014-10-11-Amicus-001.mp3>
>
> On Ep. 1 of Amicus, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick discusses the opening
> of the Surpreme Court’s new term with Tom Goldstein, publisher of
> SCOTUSblog. Dahlia also welcomes Douglas Laycock, who argued the
> case of a Muslim prisoner who wants to grow a beard.
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67792&title=Interview%20with%20Dahlia%20Lithwick%3A%20%E2%80%9CAmicus%3A%20Ballot%20Box%20Special%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting
> Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “Former state Sen. Wright’s jail term ends quickly”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67790>
>
> Posted onNovember 1, 2014 11:33 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67790>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> LAT
> <http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-rod-wright-jail-20141031-story.html>:
> “Former Democratic state Sen. Roderick D. Wright showed up late Friday
> to begin serving a 90-day jail sentence but was released almost
> immediately due to jail crowding, a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s
> Department spokeswoman said. A jury convicted Wright earlier this year
> on eight felony counts, including perjury and voting fraud, in a case
> that centered on whether he had lied about living in the district he
> sought to represent.”
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67790&title=%E2%80%9CFormer%20state%20Sen.%20Wright%E2%80%99s%20jail%20term%20ends%20quickly%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,residency
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=38>
>
>
> “It’s Time for a Constitutional Right to Vote, and a Truce in the
> Voting Wars” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67788>
>
> Posted onNovember 1, 2014 11:28 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67788>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Rob Richie blogs.
> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/its-time-for-a-constituti_b_6084836.html>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67788&title=%E2%80%9CIt%E2%80%99s%20Time%20for%20a%20Constitutional%20Right%20to%20Vote%2C%20and%20a%20Truce%20in%20the%20Voting%20Wars%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
>
> “500 Ohio, Kentucky judicial races, few choices”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67786>
>
> Posted onNovember 1, 2014 11:26 am
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67786>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Gannett reports.
> <http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/11/01/ohio-kentucky-judicial-races-choices/18265883/>
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67786&title=%E2%80%9C500%20Ohio%2C%20Kentucky%20judicial%20races%2C%20few%20choices%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial
> elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> Super Creepy Picture of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67778>
>
> Posted onOctober 31, 2014 3:38 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67778>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> 141031_ScaryAds.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge
> <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/141031_ScaryAds.jpg.CROP_.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg>
>
> From a real live judicial elections ad, as described inthe new Slate
> piece
> <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/judicial_election_outrageous_ads_campaign_contributions_break_records.html>with
> Dahlia Lithwick
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67778&title=Super%20Creepy%20Picture%20of%20the%20Day&description=>
> Posted injudicial elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
>
>
> Updated Analysis: Grimes Campaign Suing over McConnell “Election
> Violations” Mailer <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67776>
>
> Posted onOctober 31, 2014 3:34 pm
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67776>byRick Hasen
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> So reports
> <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/31/grimes-campaign-exploring-legal-options-against-mcconnell.html>The
> Daily Beast. UPDATE: TPM hasthe complaint
> <https://www.scribd.com/doc/245146077/Grimes-Campaign-Complaint-10-31-14>.
> It alleges a violation of KRS119.155
> <http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=27752>, which makes it
> a crime to, among other things “intimidate[] or attempts to intimidate
> any voter so as to prevent him from casting his ballot.” That’s what
> the Grimes campaign alleges the flyer does.
>
> I don’t buy it. Some people might be confused by the flyer and maybe
> even think they are accused of some kind of elections code violation.
> But anyone who reads it will see it is clearly a nasty attack ad aimed
> at Grimes.
>
> Voters are not stupid nor so easily intimidated.
>
> Let me be clearer about the Grimes suit. I see it as a publicity
> device to accuse McConnell of being a vote suppressor.
>
> The real evil of the ad is that it is misleading. But it is hard
> enough to regulate false campaign speech—there are very serious First
> Amendment problems trying to regulate misleading campaign speech. See
> myA Constitutional Right to Lie in Campaigns and Elections?
> <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151618>
>
> Yes we are knee deep in the silly season.
>
> [This post has been updated.]
>
> Share
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67776&title=Updated%20Analysis%3A%20Grimes%20Campaign%20Suing%20over%20McConnell%20%E2%80%9CElection%20Violations%E2%80%9D%20Mailer&description=>
> Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,chicanery
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,The Voting Wars
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
>
> --
> 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/20141103/6e7b356f/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/20141103/6e7b356f/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 63051 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141103/6e7b356f/attachment.jpe>
View list directory