[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/3/14
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu Oct 2 19:54:32 PDT 2014
What's Happened So Far in Election Litigation This Week?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66287>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:52 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66287>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Seems like time for a recap (or scorecard).
The U.S. Supreme Courtrestored Ohio's cutbacks
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66036>in early voting, which a district
court had put on hold and the Sixth Circuit had affirmed.
A three judge panel of Kansas judges
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66159>did not force Democrats to run a
candidate in the Kansas U.S. Senate race, and ballots are now being
printed without a Democrat, a move expected to hurt the incumbent
Republican Senator Pat Roberts (running against independent Greg Orman)
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit temporarily
put on hold two aspects of North Carolina's restrictive voting laws---an
end to same day voter registration and and end of counting of ballots
cast in the wrong precinct.North Carolina has appealed
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66256>to the U.S. Supreme Court and the
Chief Justice has asked for a response from voting rights advocates by
Sunday at 5.
After the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit divided
5-5 over whether Wisconsin's voter id law can be implemented right now,
before a final appeal is considered on whether the id requirement
violates the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act, challengers of the
law havegone to the Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66198>to
get the id requirement blocked for use in this election.Justice Kagan
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66252>has asked for a response from
Wisconsin by Tuesday at 5.
The Mississippi Supreme Courtheard oral
arguments<http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/10/02/high-court-mulls-mcdaniel-appeal/16601115/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter>over
whether Chris McDaniel's election challenge in the U.S. Senate
Republican primary against incumbent Thad Cochran was untimely.
The Arkansas Supreme Courtheard oral arguments
<http://swtimes.com/news/state-news/arkansas-supreme-court-hears-oral-arguments-voter-id-case>over
whether the state's voter id law was properly put on hold by a trial court.
The Supreme Courtagreed to hear major cases
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66201>involving whether citizen
redistricting commissions for Congressional districts violate state
legislature's power to set the rules for Congressional elections and a
case on judicial campaign speech.
And we are still expecting a ruling any time from federal district court
on whether Texas's voter id law violates the Constitution and Section 2
of the Voting Rights Act.
Yes, we are just weeks before the election and the voting warsare more
than heating up
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/09/voting_restrictions_may_reach_the_supreme_court_from_ohio_wisconsin_north.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66287&title=What%E2%80%99s%20Happened%20So%20Far%20in%20Election%20Litigation%20This%20Week%3F&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Arkansas Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Voter ID Case"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66285>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66285>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ruling is expected soon
<http://swtimes.com/news/state-news/arkansas-supreme-court-hears-oral-arguments-voter-id-case>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66285&title=%E2%80%9CArkansas%20Supreme%20Court%20Hears%20Oral%20Arguments%20In%20Voter%20ID%20Case%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>
CA Redistricting Commissions Could Be in Danger from AZ Supreme
Court Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66283>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:32 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66283>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Savage
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-supreme-court-arizona-20140930-story.html>of
the LAT reports.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66283&title=CA%20Redistricting%20Commissions%20Could%20Be%20in%20Danger%20from%20AZ%20Supreme%20Court%20Case&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"U.S. high court could toss out Ariz. voting boundaries"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66281>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66281>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Arizona Republic reports
<http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/10/02/us-supreme-court-toss-arizona-voting-boundaries/16597969/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66281&title=%E2%80%9CU.S.%20high%20court%20could%20toss%20out%20Ariz.%20voting%20boundaries%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>
"Cooper asks US Supreme Court to block federal appeals court ruling
on elections law" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66279>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:27 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66279>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The /News and Observer /reports.
<http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/02/4202091_cooper-asks-us-supreme-court-to.html?sp=/99/102/105//&rh=1>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66279&title=%E2%80%9CCooper%20asks%20US%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20block%20federal%20appeals%20court%20ruling%20on%20elections%20law%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>
"Prop. 47 asks Californians to reduce drug, theft penalties"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66276>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:22 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66276>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bob Egelko
<http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Prop-47-asks-Californians-to-reduce-drug-theft-5797274.php>:
"The ballot measures reflect a recurring legislative logjam on crime
issues in which prosecutors and defense lawyers have been far more
successful at blocking their opponents' bills than at passing their own."
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66276&title=%E2%80%9CProp.%2047%20asks%20Californians%20to%20reduce%20drug%2C%20theft%20penalties%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted indirect democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>
"Jerry Brown vetoes California political ethics bills"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66274>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 7:20 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66274>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
SacBee reports
<http://www.sacbee.com/2014/09/30/6749230/jerry-brown-vetoes-political-ethics.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#mi_rss=Capitol%20Alert>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66274&title=%E2%80%9CJerry%20Brown%20vetoes%20California%20political%20ethics%20bills%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inconflict of interest laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>
"McAuliffe aide suggested job for senator's daughter if he remained
in his seat" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66271>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 6:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66271>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/mcauliffe-aide-suggested-job-for-senators-daughter-if-he-remained-in-his-seat/2014/10/02/e4564904-4984-11e4-b72e-d60a9229cc10_story.html>:
"Gov. Terry McAuliffe's chief of staff left a voicemail for a Democrat
who was on the verge of quitting the state Senate in June, saying that
the lawmaker's daughter might get a top state job if he stayed to
support the governor's uphill bid to expand Medicaid, according to
descriptions from three people who heard the recording."
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66271&title=%E2%80%9CMcAuliffe%20aide%20suggested%20job%20for%20senator%E2%80%99s%20daughter%20if%20he%20remained%20in%20his%20seat%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Voter registration in Ferguson surges after Brown killing"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66269>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 5:13 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66269>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
USA Today
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/02/ferguson-vote-registration/16572305/>:
"More than 3,000 people have registered to vote in Ferguson, Mo., since
the death of Michael Brown --- a surge in interest that may mean the
city of 21,000 people is ready for a change."
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66269&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20registration%20in%20Ferguson%20surges%20after%20Brown%20killing%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
I Have a Headache: #MSSEN <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66267>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 2:49 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66267>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
As if the torrent of election-related litigation today is not enough,
theClarion Ledger reports
<http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/10/02/high-court-mulls-mcdaniel-appeal/16601115/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter>that
if (when) Chris McDaniel loses in the state supreme court in his
election challenge to Sen. Thad Cochran, he could run to federal court
to raise (frivolous) First Amendment issues.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66267&title=I%20Have%20a%20Headache%3A%20%23MSSEN&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Question of the Day: Texas Voter ID Edition
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66265>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 2:45 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66265>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
So let's say you are the federal district judge inclined to issue an
opinion striking down Texas's voter id law. Do you issue something now,
barring its use in the upcoming election (raising the ubiquitous Purcell
issue aside from the merits), knowing there's a good chance you get
quickly reversed by the 5th Circuit or SCOTUS, or do you wait until
after this election, when Texas will be able to point to more evidence
that the sky did not fall with the use of voter id in the midterm elections?
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66265&title=Question%20of%20the%20Day%3A%20Texas%20Voter%20ID%20Edition&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Want the Big Picture on All the Voting Cases at the Supreme Court
This Week? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66263>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 2:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66263>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I try to put them in context inthis piece
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/09/voting_restrictions_may_reach_the_supreme_court_from_ohio_wisconsin_north.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66263&title=Want%20the%20Big%20Picture%20on%20All%20the%20Voting%20Cases%20at%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20This%20Week%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
Breaking: North Carolina Files Emergency #SCOTUS Petition in Same
Day Voting, Precinct Voting Case: Analysis
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66256>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 1:47 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66256>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have now had a chance to read North Carolina's32-page petition
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/North-Carolina-voting-applic.-14A358.pdf> (with
an extensive appendix) asking for the Supreme Court to reverse an order
issued by the 4th Circuit on a 2-1 vote
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/NC-Opinion.pdf> requiring
North Carolina to restore same day voter registration and the counting
of out of precinct ballots in the upcoming election. It is quite a feat
to file such an impressive document in just a little more than 24 hours
afterthe 4th Circuit's decision <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66138>,
regardless of whether NC ultimately should prevail. [The Chief Justice
has now ordered a response by September 5 at 5 pm, two days earlier than
the response is due in the WI case.]
I think there is a good chance North Carolina will prevail in on this
emergency motion and get these changes stopped, even though I believe
that North Carolina's ominbus bill, which contains the toughest set of
voting restrictions I've seen in a single law passed anywhere since the
passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, should be found to be
unconstitutional. (My theory ---advanced in this /Harvard Law Review
Forum /piece
<http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/01/race-or-party-how-courts-should-think-about-republican-efforts-to-make-it-harder-to-vote-in-north-carolina-and-elsewhere/>--is
that it should be unconstitutional for a state to impose significant
burdens on voters for no good reasons or for partisan reasons.)
The state makes two main arguments in support of its position.
1. The 4th Circuit's reading of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is
too broad. The 4th Circuit majority had offered a generous but
reasonable reading of the scope of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The district court had offered a much narrower reading of the scope of
section 2. As I explainedin my piece in /Slate /this week,
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/09/voting_restrictions_may_reach_the_supreme_court_from_ohio_wisconsin_north.html>the
conservative 5-Justice Supreme Court majority is ultimately likely to
side with the narrower view of section 2 and not find the North Carolina
cutbacks to be a section 2 violation. Because one of the key factors in
considering whether the Supreme Court should grant this emergency relief
is the likelihood that North Carolina will be successful in the Supreme
Court (should the Court take the case), the merits matter for the stay.
2. North Carolina also makes much of the chaos it sees (and the affront
to state sovereignty it objects to) in changing the election rules so
close to the objection. This is the /Purcell/objection, and it is in
play in the North Carolina case as well. The main difference in the 4th
Circuit between the majority and the the dissent was over the question
whether making these changes now is going to cause confusion and impose
a burden on election officials and the state in light of Supreme Court
admonitions not to change election rules so close to the election. North
Carolina says that poll workers cannot deal with these changes at this
late date. As I indicatedin a
post<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66196>last night, the /Purcell/delay
issue is tricky for opponents of both Wisconsin's and North Carolina's
laws. Both involve last minute changes, but WI involves a new
restriction while NC involves lifting new restrictions. Both change the
status quo. The question is whether the cases can be distinguished on
the risk of disenfranchising voters.
It seems quite likely that the Purcell issue leads the Court to issue
stays in /both/WI and NC, which also has a nice political appeal to
it---as opposed to all 5 conservative Justices voting in favor of voting
restrictions in OH, WI and NC and all 4 liberal Justices voting against
the voting restrictions.
Stay tuned.
[This post has been updated.]
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66256&title=Breaking%3A%20North%20Carolina%20Files%20Emergency%20%23SCOTUS%20Petition%20in%20Same%20Day%20Voting%2C%20Precinct%20Voting%20Case%3A%20Analysis&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,voting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
"Here's the Latest in the GOP's Push to Restrict Voting"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66254>
Posted onOctober 2, 2014 1:37 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66254>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
John Light writes
<http://billmoyers.com/2014/10/02/the-gop-push-to-restrict-voting-2014-edition/>for
Moyers & Co.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66254&title=%E2%80%9CHere%E2%80%99s%20the%20Latest%20in%20the%20GOP%E2%80%99s%20Push%20to%20Restrict%20Voting%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/20141002/26276eb6/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/20141002/26276eb6/attachment.png>
View list directory