[EL] more news 10/2/14

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu Oct 2 13:14:04 PDT 2014


    Justice Kagan Orders Wisconsin to Respond in Voter ID Case
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66252>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 1:12 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66252>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The response is due Oct. 7 at 5 pm. My earlier analysis of the case and 
its chances at SCOTUS ishere <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66198>.

Here 
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/14a352.htm>is 
the docket.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66252&title=Justice%20Kagan%20Orders%20Wisconsin%20to%20Respond%20in%20Voter%20ID%20Case&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting 
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>


    "Justices Take Cases on Redistricting and Judicial Elections"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66249>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 12:45 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66249>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Adam Liptak writes 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/us/justices-take-cases-on-redistricting-and-judicial-elections.html?ref=politics>for 
the NYT.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66249&title=%E2%80%9CJustices%20Take%20Cases%20on%20Redistricting%20and%20Judicial%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    "Justices say replacement candidate should be on ballot"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66247>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 12:39 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66247>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News<http://wvrecord.com/news/269742-justices-say-replacement-candidate-should-be-on-ballot>from 
West Va.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66247&title=%E2%80%9CJustices%20say%20replacement%20candidate%20should%20be%20on%20ballot%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    "Voting rights advocates want Supreme Court to block Wisconsin voter
    ID law" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66245>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 12:34 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66245>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Reid Wilson 
reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/10/02/voting-rights-advocates-want-supreme-court-to-block-wisconsin-voter-id-law/>for 
WaPo.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66245&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20rights%20advocates%20want%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20block%20Wisconsin%20voter%20ID%20law%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    Upcoming Talks on Campaign Finance at Oxford, Kings College
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66243>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 12:06 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66243>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I'll be speaking to the Public Law discussion groupat 
Oxford<http://www.law.ox.ac.uk/event=13216>on Oct 14.

And I'll be on a panel with Tim Kuhnerat Kings College's law school 
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/law/newsevents/eventrecords/Why-Is-It-Impossible-To-Keep-Big-Money-Out-Of-Politics-Lessons-From-America.aspx>on 
Oct. 16.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66243&title=Upcoming%20Talks%20on%20Campaign%20Finance%20at%20Oxford%2C%20Kings%20College&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    #MSSEN: "High Court Hears McDaniel v. Cochran Arguments"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66241>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 12:01 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66241>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The/Jackson Free Press/reports. 
<http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2014/oct/02/high-court-hears-mcdaniel-v-cochran-arguments/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66241&title=%23MSSEN%3A%20%E2%80%9CHigh%20Court%20Hears%20McDaniel%20v.%20Cochran%20Arguments%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    "Colorado judge: State political parties can form Super PACs"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66239>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 11:55 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66239>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Colorado Independent reports 
<http://www.coloradoindependent.com/149588/colorado-judge-state-political-parties-can-form-super-pacs>on 
thisnew ruling 
<http://www.citizensforethics.org/page/-/COLORADO/pdfs/SOS/Order%20on%20COGOP%20SJ%20Motion.pdf>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66239&title=%E2%80%9CColorado%20judge%3A%20State%20political%20parties%20can%20form%20Super%20PACs%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    Texas Judge Sues Texas in State Court Claiming Voter ID Law Violates
    State Constitution <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66237>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 11:48 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66237>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This 
<http://www.texastribune.org/2014/10/02/criminal-appeals-court-judge-files-voter-id-lawsui/>is 
a strange one.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66237&title=Texas%20Judge%20Sues%20Texas%20in%20State%20Court%20Claiming%20Voter%20ID%20Law%20Violates%20State%20Constitution&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>


    Here We Go Again with Judge Randa and Campaign Finance in Wisconsin
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66234>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:54 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66234>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Journal-Sentinel: 
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/group-sues-state-in-hopes-of-collaborating-with-candidates-b99363540z1-277907881.html>

      A Milwaukee County group sued Wisconsin officials Thursday arguing
    it has a constitutional right to collaborate with candidates,
    raising issues at the heart of a legal battle over whether Gov.
    Scott Walker and conservative organizations have illegally worked
    together.

    Citizens for Responsible Government Advocates has not been involved
    in the investigation connected to Walker. But its lawsuit is taking
    on what has been raised in the investigation into his campaign's
    activities. CRG is being represented by the lawyers working for one
    of the groups at the center of the probe, the Wisconsin Club for Growth.

    Thursday's filing in U.S. District Court in Milwaukee is the sixth
    lawsuit connected in some way to the probe. It is being heard by
    Judge Rudolph Randa, who in another lawsuit in May issued an order
    halting the investigation. Randa was overruled last month by a panel
    of federal appeals judges, but the investigation remains stalled as
    state courts consider the probe.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66234&title=Here%20We%20Go%20Again%20with%20Judge%20Randa%20and%20Campaign%20Finance%20in%20Wisconsin&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    "Voter ID law in Wisconsin challenged"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66232>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:52 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66232>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Lyle Denniston reports 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/voter-id-law-in-wisconsin-challenged/>for 
SCOTUSBlog. My analysis of the filing ishere 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66198>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66232&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20law%20in%20Wisconsin%20challenged%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


    "ANALYSIS: U.S. Supreme Court's Decision To Hear Arizona
    Redistricting Case, Most Likely In January"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66230>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:29 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66230>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This 
post<http://arizonaspolitics.blogspot.com/2014/10/analysis-us-supreme-courts-decision-to.html>appears 
at Arizona's Politics.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66230&title=%E2%80%9CANALYSIS%3A%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Decision%20To%20Hear%20Arizona%20Redistricting%20Case%2C%20Most%20Likely%20In%20January%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    "New proposed 'pay-to-play' rule draws criticism from free speech
    group" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66228>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:20 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66228>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CCP press release. 
<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2014/10/02/new-proposed-pay-to-play-rule-draws-criticism-from-free-speech-group/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66228&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20proposed%20%E2%80%98pay-to-play%E2%80%99%20rule%20draws%20criticism%20from%20free%20speech%20group%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    The NVRA and the Arkansas AG candidate
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66220>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:17 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66220>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

Rick postedyesterday <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66184>on an Arkansas 
registrar's decision to cancel the registration of Leslie Rutledge, a 
candidate for state AG, after it was brought to the registrar's 
attention that Ms. Rutledge had been registered in another state.  One 
of the issues, apparently, is whether the cancellation came too late in 
the cycle.

There are two different provisions of the NVRA at issue.

One issection 8(c)(2) 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/20507-> (which is apparently 
now 52 USC 20507, in the new and still unfamiliar Title 52).  That's the 
90-day "pencils down" provision.  It says that "a State shall complete, 
not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general 
election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to 
systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official 
lists of eligible voters."  Unless the AG candidate (Leslie Rutledge) 
was caught up in a sweep under a "program" with the purpose to 
systematically remove similar people, the 90-day provision doesn't 
appear to apply.  This is the part that Rick was mentioning.

BUT.  The other applicable provision issection 8(d) 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/20507->, which says that a 
State may not cancel a voter's registration on the grounds that the 
person has changed residence --- any cancelled registration, not just a 
purge as part of a "program" --- unless the registrant 1) confirms in 
writing that the registrant has changed residence or 2) has been sent a 
notice, hasn't responded, and hasn't voted in the jurisdiction for two 
cycles after the notice was sent.

Igather <http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34959#.VCzn3GddW_g>that the 
clerk's official reason for the purge is that Ms. Rutledge has changed 
her residence (apparently, because she registered in DC in 2008 and 
Virginia in 2010), and that her registration in another state served as 
"written confirmation" of a change of residence.  That's an 
interpretation of the Act that I think is seriously suboptimal.  But 
it's one that I understand a fair number of registrars are using when 
they cancel registrations after receiving results of an interstate 
matching protocol, and finding what is ostensibly the same person listed 
as more recently registered in another state. More careful registrars 
(and there are many) do a lot more investigation when they get such 
results, just in case it's theotherregistration that's invalid.

Or maybe they're both valid. Perhaps Ms. Rutledge was registered in 
Arkansas, moved to DC and became a voter there, and then re-established 
residence in Arkansas.  (There seems to be a 2008 absentee ballot cast 
from DC, in Arkansas, that raises other serious questions.)  The 
clerkapparently issued a registration card 
<http://www.leslierutledge.com/unbelievable>to Ms. Rutledge in 2013.  
Which means that whatever the validity of Ms. Rutledge's status as an 
eligible Arkansas voter in the interim, it's not clear how the (old) DC 
registration could serve as valid written confirmation that Ms. Rutledge 
has (now) changed residence out of Arkansas, particularly when she's got 
more recent written confirmation that she lives in Arkansas.

More generally, I think it's worth noting that an outside group 
apparently checking for duplicate registrations --- the "Arkansas 
Libertarian Coalition 
<http://www.thecitywire.com/node/34959#.VCzn3GddW_g>," if indeed they 
exist --- seems to have raised the issue. Whether they had the most 
civic motives in mind or not, there'salso a substantial risk that groups 
that are data-mining for challenges to registration status or residency 
<http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/29/the-danger-of-voter-fraud-vigilantes/>can 
misinterpret the information they get --- and when the challenges come 
at the last minute, there can be insufficient time to clear things up 
before the election itself.  That's part of why the 90-day provision 
exists.  But registrars ought to have a healthy skepticism about this 
sort of information --- or, at least, double-check the ramifications --- 
before acting on it, even when they're not acting as part of a 
"systematic program."

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66220&title=The%20NVRA%20and%20the%20Arkansas%20AG%20candidate&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>,statutory interpretation 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21>,voter registration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>


    "FAN 34.2 (First Amendment News) --- Court agrees to hear judicial
    campaign solicitation case" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66224>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:12 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66224>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Very useful Ron Collins post 
<http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2014/10/fan-34-2-first-amendment-news-court-agrees-to-hear-judicial-campaign-solicitation-case.html>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66224&title=%E2%80%9CFAN%2034.2%20%28First%20Amendment%20News%29%20%E2%80%94%20Court%20agrees%20to%20hear%20judicial%20campaign%20solicitation%20case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial 
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>


    10th Circuit to Hear Citizens United Disclosure Case Oct. 7 in
    Denver, 10 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66222>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:10 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66222>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The panel is Hartz, Tymkovich & Phillips.

Judge Tymkovich is teaching election law this term, by the way.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66222&title=10th%20Circuit%20to%20Hear%20Citizens%20United%20Disclosure%20Case%20Oct.%207%20in%20Denver%2C%2010%20am&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    "Fate of non-partisan redistricting on the line"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66219>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 10:07 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66219>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Lyle Denniston blogs. 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/fate-of-non-partisan-redistricting-on-the-line/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66219&title=%E2%80%9CFate%20of%20non-partisan%20redistricting%20on%20the%20line%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incitizen commissions 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=7>,redistricting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    "Changing Voting Rules After Ballots Are Cast"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66216>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 8:50 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66216>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ned Foley 
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/election-law/article/?article=12947>on WI 
voter id:

                     There is one more crucial point about the Wisconsin
    case that has not yet been fully developed.  As a factual matter,
    the emergency stay application observes that absentee ballots have
    been already been cast based on a rule in place (per the April
    injunction) that the new voter ID requirement did not apply.  The
    Seventh Circuit's reinstatement of the ID requirement now makes
    those absentee ballots void and uncountable unless the voters come
    forth with the required ID---a requirement not in effect at the time
    when they cast those ballots.  Indeed, the instructions that these
    absentee voters received with their ballot did not alert them to the
    need to provide the required ID.  The stay application says that to
    disenfranchise these absentee voters "after the fact" based on a
    change in the rules since they cast those ballots would be
    "unconscionable" (page 14)---unconscionability being a potent
    "equitable" factor.

    But it would be more than unconscionable.  It would be
    unconstitutional.  The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
    Amendment has been properly interpreted to bar changes in the rules
    for counting ballots after they have been cast.  The leading case,
    from the First Circuit, is /Griffin v. Burns/, 570 F.2d 1065 (1st
    Cir. 1978).  It, too, involved absentee ballots.  Rhode Island
    election officials had made absentee ballots available to voters. 
    After the ballots had been cast, the state supreme court ruled that
    these voters should not have received those ballots.  (It was a
    primary election, and the state court said absentee ballots were
    available only in general elections.) Too late, said the First
    Circuit.  It violates Due Process to give voters ballots telling
    them they will count if cast and then, after they are cast, say
    "surprise" they won't count after all.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66216&title=%E2%80%9CChanging%20Voting%20Rules%20After%20Ballots%20Are%20Cast%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    "The Supreme Court Just Took A Case That Could Make Partisan
    Gerrymandering Even Worse" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66214>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 8:40 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66214>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ian Millhiser blogs. 
<http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/10/02/3575068/the-supreme-court-just-took-a-case-that-could-make-partisan-gerrymandering-even-worse/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66214&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Supreme%20Court%20Just%20Took%20A%20Case%20That%20Could%20Make%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Even%20Worse%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incitizen commissions 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=7>,Elections Clause 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=70>,redistricting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    "Three years later, Pentagon unit still hides Internet voting test
    results" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66212>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 8:34 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66212>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

McClatchy 
<http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/01/4198992_three-years-later-pentagon-unit.html?rh=1>: 
"A nonprofit watchdog group is suing an obscure Defense Department unit 
over its failure for three years to disclose the results of testing on 
the security safeguards of Internet voting systems that are increasingly 
being used to cast absentee ballots."

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66212&title=%E2%80%9CThree%20years%20later%2C%20Pentagon%20unit%20still%20hides%20Internet%20voting%20test%20results%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted ininternet voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=49>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>


    "Thank Shareholders for the Ever-Shrinking ALEC"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66210>

Posted onOctober 2, 2014 8:30 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66210>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs. 
<http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/thank-shareholders-ever-shrinking-alec>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66210&title=%E2%80%9CThank%20Shareholders%20for%20the%20Ever-Shrinking%20ALEC%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <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/20141002/a2e4b968/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141002/a2e4b968/attachment.png>


View list directory