[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/19/14
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Sun Oct 19 13:49:37 PDT 2014
"Dawn Patrol: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's critically important 5
a.m. wake-up call on voting rights"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67113>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:48 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67113>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have writtenthis new
piece<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/ginsburg_s_dissent_in_texas_voter_id_law_supreme_court_order.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top>for
Slate. It begins:
On the surface, Supreme Court justices seem to have it pretty easy:
They decide only around 70 cases per year with a written opinion,
meaning each of the nine justices on average gets assigned to write
fewer than nine majority opinions per year
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/SCOTUSblog_opinionsbysitting_OT13.pdf>.
They do not sit for regular argument in July, August, or September;
and some justices use part of those summer months
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/08/supreme_court_s_recess_can_we_afford_to_have_the_nine_justices_spend_three_months_on_vacation_.html> to
moonlight as guest law professors in exotic locations.
But every so often court watchers are reminded that these justices
are working very hard behind the scenes by reading briefs,
exchanging memos, and debating outcomes. Case in point: The justices
issued an order and a dissent in a Texas voting rights case
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Texas-order-voter-ID-10-18-14.pdf> at
5 a.m. Saturday morning
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/us/supreme-court-upholds-texas-voter-id-law.html?ref=politics&_r=0>.
Supreme Court reporters stood by all night
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/court-wont-interrupt-texas-voter-id-law/> for
the ruling. The holdup apparently was Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's
six-page dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
The Supreme Court allowed Texas to use its voter ID law in the
upcoming election, even though a federal court decided a few weeks
ago that Texas' law violated both the Constitution and the Voting
Rights Act, and that Texas engaged in intentional racial
discrimination in voting. The trial court had barred Texas from
using its law this election, but the United States Court of Appeals
for the 5th Circuit reversed that decision last week, and the law's
challengers went to the Supreme Court, where, as expected
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/supreme_court_voting_rights_decisions_contradictions_in_wisconsin_ohio_north.html>,
the court sided with Texas.
The Supreme Court's order was consistent with some of its other
recent orders indicating that lower courts should not change the
rules of running an election shortly before voting begins. I have
dubbed this rule the "/Purcell/ Principle
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/supreme_court_voting_rights_decisions_contradictions_in_wisconsin_ohio_north.html>,"
for a2006 Supreme Court case so concluding
<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/us/06a375.pdf>.
The court had to decide the emergency request very quickly---early
voting begins in Texas on Monday morning---but Justice Ginsburg did
not need to write her extensive dissent. The week before, when
Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas dissented
from a Supreme Court order putting Wisconsin's voter ID law on hold,
their entire dissent was only a few sentences. It was a dissent
which disturbingly treated <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66784> the
right to vote as less important than deference to the Court of
Appeals judgment, kind of an Anti-Purcell Principle.
Sometimes justices disagree with emergency court orders such as
these and do not even bother to write a formal dissent. And
recently, as */Slate/*'s Dahlia Lithwick has noted
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/supreme_court_unsigned_orders_stays_and_injunctions_no_explanations_in_voter.html>,
the majority has not been explaining its various orders in cases
from voting rights, to abortion, to same sex marriage, at all.
So why did Justice Ginsburg keep the court and court-watchers up all
night for a relatively lengthy dissent from an order issued with no
majority opinion? There is no way to know from the outside, but my
guess is that she wanted to make an important statement about how
the Supreme Court should handle these voting cases going forward and
to publicly flag where she believes the court is going wrong. Like a
rare oral dissent from the bench after a written opinion
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/07/scotus-for-law-students-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law-dissenting-from-the-bench/>,
this middle-of-the-night dissent calls attention to what Justice
Ginsburg likely sees as a grave injustice.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67113&title=%E2%80%9CDawn%20Patrol%3A%20Justice%20Ruth%20Bader%20Ginsburg%E2%80%99s%20critically%20important%205%20a.m.%20wake-up%20call%20on%20voting%20rights%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>
Explaining Justice Breyer's Surprising (Non-)Vote in the Texas Voter
ID Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67111>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67111>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Justice Breyer did not join inJustice Ginsburg's fiery 6-page dissent
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/ginsburg_s_dissent_in_texas_voter_id_law_supreme_court_order.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top>in
theTexas voter id case
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Texas-order-voter-ID-10-18-14.pdf> the
Supreme Court just decided. The majority let Texas's law go into effect,
despite a final judgment from a federal district court finding Texas
engaged in intentional racial discrimination in voting, and violated
both the Equal Protection Clause and the Voting Rights Act.
Justice Ginsburg's dissent was joined by Justice Kagan and Justice
Sotomayor but not Justice Breyer, the other liberal on the Court. Why not?
We don't know for sure, but here are the possibilities, put in order of
what I think is most to least likely:
1. Justice Breyer still dissented, but did not want to publicly state
(Justices do not always state their votes in these orders), perhaps
because he disagreed with one or more aspects of Justice Ginsburg's dissent.
2. Justice Breyer still dissented, but was not available until 5 am to
review to see if he agreed with Justice Ginsburg's dissent.
3. Justice Breyer agreed with the majority, because he believes more
strongly inthe Purcell principle
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/supreme_court_voting_rights_decisions_contradictions_in_wisconsin_ohio_north.html>(or
he agrees Texas should win on the merits---which seems less likely).
4. Justice Breyer disagreed with the majority, but either he did not
publicly dissent or voted with the majority for strategic reasons, as
could have happened before in theNorth Carolina case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66570>. This seems less likely--in the
North Carolina case, the Justices knew the Wisconsin case was in the
wings. There's nothing else now on this same Purcell issue coming up,
nor any reason to think that the next set of Purcell cases in future
elections will be those that will help to protect voting rights.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67111&title=Explaining%20Justice%20Breyer%E2%80%99s%20Surprising%20%28Non-%29Vote%20in%20the%20Texas%20Voter%20ID%20Case&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>
Teachout's "Corruption in America" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67109>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67109>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
[/This is the latest in a series
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=61972> of short
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=62631> reflections
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64647>onnew
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66532>books in campaign finance which I
am working my way through as I write my own manuscript on the subject.]/
Zephyr Teachout's/Corruption in America/
<http://www.amazon.com/Corruption-America-Benjamin-Franklins-Citizens/dp/0674050401/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1413750884&sr=8-1&keywords=corruption+in+america>is
a lively and valuable look at the common and judicial understandings of
the concept of "corruption" in the United States during the time of the
founding and at other key points in U.S. history. The historical
analysis builds up to a contrast with the Supreme Court's current narrow
definition of corruption in the/Citizens United/line of cases and to an
argument for courts, scholars, and society to adopt a broader
anticorruption principle in both constitutional adjudication and
argumentation and in legislative drafting (on the latter point, Teachout
favors broad prophylactic rules, in a Madisonian way, to remove the
temptation of those in power to act corruptly).
I will have more to say about Teachout and the focus on corruption in my
own campaign finance book in progress. I would just say now that as a
matter of constitutional interpretation I find her corruption concept
rather fuzzy (I continue to believe that much of what she (and Lessig)
would call corruption is more properly considered an issue of
inequality), and her discussion of the First Amendment interests on the
other side of the equation in the constitutional balancing relatively
light. But this is a book well worth reading for anyone trying to get a
broader historical perspective on current battles in the Supreme Court
on the constitutionality of campaign finance rules.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67109&title=Teachout%E2%80%99s%20%E2%80%9CCorruption%20in%20America%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Joan Biskupic's Must-Read Book on Justice Sotomayor and the Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67107>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:33 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67107>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Supreme Court reporter (and current Reuters legal editor)Joan Biskupic
<http://blogs.reuters.com/joan-biskupic/>has writtenBreaking In: The
Rise of Sonia Sotomayor and the Politics of Justice
<http://www.amazon.com/Breaking-In-Sotomayor-Politics-Justice/dp/0374298742/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1413750578&sr=8-1&keywords=biskupic>.
It is an engaging and insightful book on Justice Sonia Sotomayor's path
to the Supreme Court and the Justice's complex relationship with the
other Justices on the Court. Although not a straight-out biography, the
book tells two parallel stories: the path of Justice Sotomayor from
growing up as a poor girl with Puerto Rican parents in New York to the
U.S. Supreme Court and the politics of the first judicial nomination of
an Hispanic Justice to the Supreme Court (the material on the failed
Miguel Estrada DC Circuit nomination was particularly fascinating).
What is perhaps most original in Biskupic's reporting (which relied on
interviews with many Supreme Court Justices, although they usually would
not agree to be quoted by name) is an understanding of Justice
Sotomayor's role on the Court. Biskupic ably describes Justice
Sotomayor's strong personality, and willingness to go it alone and
sometimes to go up even against her ally Justice Ginsburg; the Justice's
move to change the nature of what it means to be a Supreme Court
Justice, and how other Justices should interact with the public, the
bar, and other members of the Court; and how her personal experiences
shape her judging. (The inside information on the drafting of
the/Fisher/affirmative action decision isespecially fascinating
<http://joshblackman.com/blog/2014/10/07/biskupic-scoop-on-sotomayor-in-fisher-v-texas-and-connection-to-schuette/>for
Court watchers).
The picture that Biskupic paints of Justice Sotomayor is much like the
picture Biskupic painted in herearlier excellent biography of Justice
Scalia:
<http://www.amazon.com/American-Original-Constitution-Supreme-Justice-ebook/dp/B003GWX8M6/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1413750724&sr=1-2>a
rich, complex, very smart person, full of contradictions, full of
passion about ideas and ideals, and still fighting some demons from
childhood. Biskupic paints in shades of gray while many other writers
who write about the Justices know only black and white--trying to make
an ideological point in the course of describing the Court. That's not
Biskupic's way. A must read.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67107&title=Joan%20Biskupic%E2%80%99s%20Must-Read%20Book%20on%20Justice%20Sotomayor%20and%20the%20Supreme%20Court&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
CJ Roberts Vote in Wisconsin Voter ID Case Proof He's Going Wobbly?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67105>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:24 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67105>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josh Gerstein
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/john-roberts-conservative-quake-112000.html>on
some noises by conservatives. I don't buy it for a second, for reasons
Josh gives in the piece---this was not a ruling on the merits, andeven
supporters of voter id laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66646>had
good reason to worry about what was happening in Wisconsin with no time
to fairly roll out the law before the election.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67105&title=CJ%20Roberts%20Vote%20in%20Wisconsin%20Voter%20ID%20Case%20Proof%20He%E2%80%99s%20Going%20Wobbly%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"Aligning Campaign Finance" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67102>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 1:06 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67102>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nick Stephanopoulos has postedthis draft
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2511079>on SSRN
(forthcoming, /Virginia Law Review/).
Campaign finance law is in crisis. In a series of recent decisions,
the Supreme Court has rejected state interests such as
anti-distortion and equality, while narrowing the anti-corruption
interest to its quid pro quo core. This core cannot sustain the bulk
of campaign finance regulation. As a result, an array of
contribution limits, expenditure limits, and public financing
programs have been struck down by the Court. If any meaningful rules
are to survive, a new interest capable of justifying them must be
found.
This Article introduces just such an interest: the alignment of
voters' policy preferences with their government's policy outputs.
Alignment is a value of deep democratic significance. If it is
achieved, then voters' views are heeded, not ignored, by their
elected representatives. Alignment also is distinct from the
interests the Court previously has rebuffed. In particular,
alignment and equality are separate concepts because equal voter
influence is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for
alignment to arise. And there is reason to think the Court might be
drawn to alignment. In decisions spanning several decades, the Court
often has affirmed that public policy ought to reflect the wishes of
the people.
It is not enough, though, if alignment is merely an appealing value.
For it to justify regulation, money in politics must be able to
produce misalignment, and campaign finance reform must be able to
promote alignment. The Article draws on a new wave of political
science scholarship to establish both propositions. This work shows
that individual donors are ideologically polarized, while parties
and PACs are more centrist in their giving. The work also finds that
politicians tend to adhere to the same positions as their principal
funders. Accordingly, policies that curb the influence of individual
donors would be valid under the alignment approach. But measures
that burden more moderate entities could not be sustained on this basis.
I read an earlier version of this piece. Recommended!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67102&title=%E2%80%9CAligning%20Campaign%20Finance%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
KY Electioneering Ban -- Modified on Appeal
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67099>
Posted onOctober 19, 2014 10:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67099>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
It looks like mywrap-up post from yesterday
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67086>is already out of date. Late
Friday, the6th Circuit granted
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141017-6th-cir.pdf>a
partial stay of theKY decision on electioneering
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66913>. The district court's order is
stayed --- and electioneering is prohibited --- within 300 feet of the
polls on the property where the polling place is located, and on other
public property. However, the district court's order stands (at least
until the appeal is heard), and electioneering is permitted, with
respect to private property like John Russell's auto body business.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67099&title=KY%20Electioneering%20Ban%20%E2%80%93%20Modified%20on%20Appeal&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
A Huge Thank You to Justin Levitt <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67097>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 7:42 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67097>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
for guest bloggingthese last ten very eventful days
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67086>. It was a round-the-clock job!
I'm just back from speaking in the UK and will have a piece tomorrowin
Slate<http://www.slate.com/authors.richard_l_hasen.html>on the Texas
voter id decision.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67097&title=A%20Huge%20Thank%20You%20to%20Justin%20Levitt&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Voter ID Laws and Partisan Competition in the American States"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67095>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 5:05 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67095>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
I missedthis new paper
<http://prq.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/15/1065912914554039.full.pdf?ijkey=a3z14k6ocCg0YKn&keytype=ref>from William
Hicks, Seth McKee, Mitchell Sellers, and Daniel Smith.
The abstract:
We undertake a comprehensive examination of restrictive voter ID
legislation in the American states from 2001 through 2012. With a
dataset containing approximately one thousand introduced and nearly
one hundred adopted voter ID laws, we evaluate the likelihood that a
state legislature introduces a restrictive voter ID bill, as well as
the likelihood that a state government adopts such a law. Voter ID
laws have evolved from a valence issue into a partisan battle, where
Republicans defend them as a safeguard against fraud while Democrats
indict them as a mechanism of voter suppression. However, voter ID
legislation is not uniform across the states; not all
Republican-controlled legislatures have pushed for more restrictive
voter ID laws. Instead, our findings show it is a combination of
partisan control and the electoral context that drives enactment of
such measures. While the prevalence of Republican lawmakers strongly
and positively influences the adoption of voter ID laws in
electorally competitive states, its effect is significantly weaker
in electorally uncompetitive states. Republicans preside over an
electoral coalition that is declining in size; where elections are
competitive, the furtherance of restrictive voter ID laws is a means
of maintaining Republican support while curtailing Democratic
electoral gains.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67095&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Laws%20and%20Partisan%20Competition%20in%20the%20American%20States%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>
Where We Stand <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67086>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 2:54 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67086>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
A wrapup of what's where in the world of prominent election-related
litigation after the events of the last week:
* AR photo ID law:not in place <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66951>.
Permanentlystruck down
<http://posting.arktimes.com/media/pdf/voter_id_opinion.pdf>by AR
Supreme Court 10/15.
* TX photo ID law:in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67060>. Struck down
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141009-TXID-Opinion.pdf>by
a federal trial court on 10/9, but that decision wasstayed
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141014-5th.pdf>by
the 5^th Circuit 10/14. After the election, the 5^th Circuit will
address an appeal on the merits.
* WI photo ID law:not in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66998>. Struck down
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/frankvwalker.pdf>by a
federal trial court 4/29, andreversed
<http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2014/D10-06/C:14-2059:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1429869:S:0>by
the 7^th Circuit on 10/6, but 7^th Circuitstayed its own mandate
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141016-7th-cir.pdf>on
10/15. After the election, the law will be back in place absent
SCOTUS activity.
* NC omnibus law:in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66538>. A federal trial courtdenied
a preliminary injunction
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-prelim-ruling.pdf>8/8;
the 4^th Circuitreversed
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/NC-Opinion.pdf>10/1
with respect to same-day registration and out-of-precinct ballot
cutbacks, and SCOTUSstayed
<https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1311436/14a358-nc.pdf>the
4^th Circuit order 10/8. After the election, the case will proceed
toward trial on all of the claims, but same-day registration and the
ability to count out-of-precinct ballots**will**be restored pending
trial.
* OH early voting cutback:in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66036>. A federal trial courtgranted
a preliminary injunction
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/072_order_granting_pi.pdf>for
the 2014 election on 9/4; the 6^th Circuitaffirmed
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/6th-early.pdf>9/24,
but SCOTUSstayed
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Ohio-order-9-29-14.pdf>the
6^th Circuit order 9/29. After the election, the case will proceed
toward trial.
* GA voter registrations:who knows
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67080>? The New Georgia Project says
there are more than50,000 forms that have not been processed
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66687>; the Secretary of State
saysthere are not
<http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2014/10/16/3360449_brian-kemp-fires-back-at-frivolous.html?rh=1>.
A hearing is scheduled in state court late next week.
* KY electioneering law:not in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66913>. On 10/14, a federal trial
courtstruck down
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141014-russell-order.pdf>the
ban on electioneering anywhere outside of the room where voting
occurs. The case is currently up on appeal.
* MS Senate race:still waiting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66267>for a ruling from the
Mississippi Supreme Court about Chris McDaniel's challenge to Thad
Cochran in the primaries.
* NC early voting site on ASU campus:not in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67082>. On 10/13, a state trial
courtrequired
<http://www.wral.com/judge-orders-county-to-provide-early-voting-site-on-app-state-campus/14074008/>that
the site be moved back to the Appalachian State campus, but an
appellate courtstayed
<http://www.wral.com/asset/news/state/nccapitol/2014/10/17/14089934/ASU_COA_Temp_stay.pdf>that
ruling on 10/17; the fight is now proceeding to the state Supreme Court.
* WI coordination ban:not in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66874>. On 10/14, a federal trial
court temporarily (and ex parte)enjoined
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/CRG-v-Barland-14C1222.pdf>enforcement
of state rules against coordinating spending with candidates, for
anything that is not express advocacy of electoral victory or
defeat. There will be further proceedings on a motion for
preliminary injunction (and perhaps an appeal of the judge's order,
though there's no appeal docketed yet).
* CT Dems' mailer using federal funds:under attack
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67070>. The Connecticut GOPfiled a
lawsuit
<http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/upload/2014/10/RPC_Summons_and_Complaint.pdf>on
10/17, protesting the Democrats' use of federal funds to support a
state campaign.
* CO disclosure for Citizens United movie:not in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66911>. A federal trial courtdenied a
preliminary injunction
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/cu-disclosure-pi.pdf>9/22,
but the 10^th Circuitordered
<https://www.scribd.com/doc/242991080/10th-Circuit-Order-in-Citizens-United-v-Gessler>on
10/14 that Citizens United needn't disclose donors involved in
making the movie (but would have to disclose donors for ads about
the movie) pending the appeal. After the election, the case will
proceed both on the appeal of the denial of a preliminary
injunction, and toward trial on the merits.
* CO disclosure for small nonprofit:not in place
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66752>. On 10/10, a federal trial
courtenjoined
<https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6BBPNUKUvKSNDFMc0pacUNDZXdPenMwLUxPaTFvMXlNaUhV/preview?pli=1>state
reporting and disclosure requirements as applied to a small
nonprofit seeking to distribute an advocacy piece. There has not
(yet) been an appeal.
* NH disclosure for push-polling:in place, but only for state
candidates <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66976>. The NH Supreme
Courtdecided
<http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/csp/cms/sites/Telegraph/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=szVRRulhARTzltonYqDc9oe2GzjtRcJecdWQQGgf_fe6NVP1tpFnob$kndF19Ps$4Aw$6wU9GSUcqtd9hs3TFeZCn0vq69IZViKeqDZhqNLziaXiKG0K_ms4C2keQo54&CONTENTTYPE=application/pdf&CONTENTDISPOSITION=push%20poll%20ruling.pdf>10/15
that the law was preempted as applied to federal candidates.
* MT ban on partisan judicial endorsements:in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67058>. A federal trial courtdenied
a preliminary injunction
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141006-french.pdf>10/1;
both the9^th Circuit
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141010-french.pdf>andSCOTUS
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/101714zr1.pdf>denied
a stay. After the election, the case will proceed toward trial.
* IN limited judicial nominations (Marion County): in place, for now
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66622>. A federal trial courtstruck
down
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141009-marion-judge.pdf>Marion
County's system of limited nominations for judicial seats, allowing
each party to nominate candidates for only some positions. But then
the judge stayed the order pending an appeal. After the election, an
appeal (filed 10/17) will proceed on the merits.
* AR language on referenda:up in the air
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66731>. Alawsuit
<http://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/case-cv-2014-1846-6.pdf>has
been filed in state court to determine whether a "for" vote is a
vote in favor of an enacted ordinance, or in favor of its repeal.
* And that's just for this election. That doesn't include the ongoing
litigation aboutballot access
<http://www.ballot-access.org/>(particularly but not exclusively for
minor parties), proof of citizenship and the federal registration
form
<http://electionlawblog.org/%20the%20Alabama%20case%20touches%20on%20the%20appropriate%20use%20of%20race%20in%20state%20decision-making,%20and%20the%20Arizona%20case%20touches%20on%20the%20appropriate%20regulation%20of%20federal%20elections%20by%20any%20body%20other%20than%20a%20state%20legislature.>,electronic
voting machines
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/Banfieldv.Cortes.php>,judicial
solicitation rules
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/williams-yulee-v-the-florida-bar/>,federal
contractor contribution limitations
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/WagnerVFEC.php>,
and the continuing fights overredistricting
<http://redistricting.lls.edu/>, including a SCOTUS case onAlabama
redistricting <http://redistricting.lls.edu/cases.php#AL>, and
another onArizona redistricting
<http://redistricting.lls.edu/cases-AZ.php#AZ>. Except that the
redistricting cases aren't just about redistricting at all:
theAlabama case
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/alabama-democratic-conference-v-alabama/>touches
on the appropriate use of race in state decision-making, and
theArizona case
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/arizona-state-legislature-v-arizona-independent-redistricting-commission/>touches
on the appropriate regulation of federal elections by any body other
than a state legislature.
All caught up? Welcome back, Rick!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67086&title=Where%20We%20Stand&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
Coverage of and Reactions to the SCOTUS TX Voter ID Ruling
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67084>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:40 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67084>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
AP
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4542226f5d5b45e39274335f8ad7df45/justices-allow-texas-use-new-voter-id-law>,The
Hill
<http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/221166-supreme-court-rules-texas-can-enforce-voter-id-law>,LA
Times
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-supreme-court-texas-voter-id-20141016-story.html#page=1>,McClatchy
<http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/10/18/243846/supreme-court-gives-green-light.html?sp=/99/200/>,MSNBC
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-approves-texas-voter-id-law>,NPR
<http://www.npr.org/2014/10/18/357153339/texas-can-enforce-voter-id-law-for-november-election>,NY
Times
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/us/supreme-court-upholds-texas-voter-id-law.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0>,Politico
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/supreme-court-scotus-voter-id-laws-texas-112007.html?hp=f1>,SCOTUSblog
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/court-wont-interrupt-texas-voter-id-law/>,Wall
St. Journal
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-allows-texas-use-of-new-voter-id-law-1413629101>,Washington
Post
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-allows-texas-to-use-voter-id-law/2014/10/18/0439b116-5623-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html?hpid=z1>,Washington
Times
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/18/supreme-court-clears-way-texas-voter-id-law/>.
Texas AG
<https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/oagnews/release.php?id=4884>,Campaign
Legal Center
<http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2649:october-18-2014-supreme-court-leaves-hundreds-of-thousands-of-texans-without-the-ability-to-vote-&catid=63:legal-center-press-releases&Itemid=61>,Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights
<http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/newsroom/press_releases?id=0521>,Leadership
Conference on Civil and Human Rights
<http://www.civilrights.org/press/2014/SCOTUS-Texas-Voter-discrimination.html>.
And aninteresting take from Christian Adams
<http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/10/18/one-last-hurrah-for-texas-voter-id/>,
predicting that the trial court's finding of intentional discrimination
will likely hold when the law is revisited after the election.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67084&title=Coverage%20of%20and%20Reactions%20to%20the%20SCOTUS%20TX%20Voter%20ID%20Ruling&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>
Stays (and Lack of Stays) Everywhere
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67082>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:39 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67082>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
On Tuesday, Inoted <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66845>that an NC trial
courtfound unlawful discrimination
<http://www.wral.com/judge-orders-county-to-provide-early-voting-site-on-app-state-campus/14074008/>against
students in the decision to move an early voting site from off of
Appalachian State's campus and into downtown Boone. Late yesterday, an
NC appellate courtstayed
<http://www.wral.com/asset/news/state/nccapitol/2014/10/17/14089934/ASU_COA_Temp_stay.pdf>that
ruling, and the fight is apparentlyheading to the NC Supreme Court
<http://www.wral.com/state-sues-to-block-app-state-early-voting-site/14089809/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67082&title=Stays%20%28and%20Lack%20of%20Stays%29%20Everywhere&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
"Georgia Secretary of State Calls New Georgia Project Claims
'Absolutely False'" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67080>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:38 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67080>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Sec. Kempresponds
<http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2014/10/16/3360449_brian-kemp-fires-back-at-frivolous.html?rh=1>to
the allegations thatmore than 50,000 registration forms are missing
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66687>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67080&title=%E2%80%9CGeorgia%20Secretary%20of%20State%20Calls%20New%20Georgia%20Project%20Claims%20%E2%80%98Absolutely%20False%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter
registration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
Dahlia Lithwick on the Arkansas ID Decision
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67078>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:38 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67078>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
The subhead reads "How an 1865 ruling in favor of Confederate soldiers
just protected the vote for minorities in Arkansas
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/arkansas_voter_id_decision_based_on_a_civil_war_case_that_protected_confederate.html>."
Like all of Dahlia's columns, worth a read. Not just because it's spicy
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/05/02/excerpts-from-wsj-interview-with-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67078&title=Dahlia%20Lithwick%20on%20the%20Arkansas%20ID%20Decision&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
"Federal Election Commission Can't Post Data on its Website in a
Timely Manner" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67076>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:38 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67076>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Michael Barone getsimpatient
<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/federal-election-commission-cant-post-data-on-its-website-in-a-timely-manner/article/2554954>.
For what it's worth, I understand that FEC data is quite important, and
I understand that it's important to have said data timely. But I
actually don't understand the policy necessity for getting
July-September FEC data within 24 hours of the deadline for reports to
be submitted. Yes, I know that this is the Online Age, and I also
twitch (and curse my pathetic excuse for an Internet provider) when it
takes my browser more than 3 seconds to load. But it seems to me that
we've mistaken the fact that most newsisinstant for a need to have most
news be instant. I notice it particularly when people demand accurate
election returns the instant the polls close, and cry foul when a
thorough count takes a bit longer to complete. And if we could all
stand to relax just a bit for the final electoral count, surely that's
true of a third-quarter finance report. Beyond the notion that we might
have to figure out other ways to occupy our curiosity, where's the fire?
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67076&title=%E2%80%9CFederal%20Election%20Commission%20Can%E2%80%99t%20Post%20Data%20on%20its%20Website%20in%20a%20Timely%20Manner%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
Russell Brand v. Johnny Rotten <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67074>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:37 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67074>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
And anargument about voting
<http://www.alternet.org/activism/russell-brands-anti-voting-revolution-makes-sex-pistols-johnny-rotten-want-puke?>.
My.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67074&title=Russell%20Brand%20v.%20Johnny%20Rotten&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Majority Whip Steve Scalise Took in $211,000 from PACs in Single
Day" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67072>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:37 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67072>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
I never havedays like this
<http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/10/majority_whip_steve_scalise_to.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67072&title=%E2%80%9CMajority%20Whip%20Steve%20Scalise%20Took%20in%20%24211%2C000%20from%20PACs%20in%20Single%20Day%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
GOP Lawsuit Over CT Dems Use of Federal Funds in Governor's Race
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67070>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:37 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67070>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Republicans havefiled a lawsuit
<http://ctmirror.org/gop-sues-claims-democrats-illegally-supporting-malloy/>over
the expenditures at issue in thisrequest for an FEC advisory opinion
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66943>, when the Democrats sent the
mailer in question before getting an answer from the FEC. Here's the
complaint
<http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/upload/2014/10/RPC_Summons_and_Complaint.pdf>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67070&title=GOP%20Lawsuit%20Over%20CT%20Dems%20Use%20of%20Federal%20Funds%20in%20Governor%E2%80%99s%20Race&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>,political
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
"Donors Use Loophole to Pour Money into Governor's Race"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67068>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:36 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67068>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
The Post and Courier has a report on theuse of related business entities
<http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20141017/PC1603/141019368/1031/texas-donor-gives-more-than-63000-to-haley-campaign-through-multiple-entities>,
each of which gives a $3,500 maximum contribution, to South Carolina
gubernatorial candidates.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67068&title=%E2%80%9CDonors%20Use%20Loophole%20to%20Pour%20Money%20into%20Governor%E2%80%99s%20Race%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
Slim MT Campaign Against EDR <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67066>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:36 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67066>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
From theHelena Independent Record
<http://helenair.com/news/local/state-and-regional/campaign-nonexistent-for-referendum-ending-election-day-voter-registration-/article_56a5519c-199b-5614-a499-67feb7488fa7.html>:
Progressive groups are putting money and shoe leather into defeating
a Republican-sponsored ballot measure that would end Election Day
voter-registration in Montana.
Yet the campaign for the measure, known as Legislative Referendum
126, is pretty much nonexistent.
A group called the Montana Equality Project, formed in February to
support LR-126, hasn't reported raising or spending a single cent
for a campaign.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67066&title=Slim%20MT%20Campaign%20Against%20EDR&description=>
Posted indirect democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>,voter
registration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
"A Look at the Battles Over Voter ID Raging in Courtrooms Across
America" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67064>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67064>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
The Blazeprovides a summary
<http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/17/a-look-at-the-battles-over-voter-id-raging-in-courtrooms-across-america/>,
through Hans von Spakovsky's eyes.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67064&title=%E2%80%9CA%20Look%20at%20the%20Battles%20Over%20Voter%20ID%20Raging%20in%20Courtrooms%20Across%20America%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted invoter id <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
"7 Indicted in Voter Fraud in Hattiesburg Mayoral Election"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67062>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 12:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67062>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Here's the story
<http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/story/news/local/hattiesburg/2014/10/17/patricia-burchell-hattiesburg-mayor-johnny-dupree-dave-ware-grand-jury/17453093/>,
though it's short on details. Most of the allegations, as I understand
it, have to do withabsentee ballots
<http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-news/2013/07/election_fraud_trial_in_hattie.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67062&title=%E2%80%9C7%20Indicted%20in%20Voter%20Fraud%20in%20Hattiesburg%20Mayoral%20Election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inabsentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>
And Now, a Ruling on Texas ID <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67060>
Posted onOctober 18, 2014 10:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67060>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
And, of course, we've now got a SCOTUS ruling on Texas ID. In thewee
hours of Saturday morning
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/court-wont-interrupt-texas-voter-id-law/>,
the Courtrefused to vacate
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Texas-order-voter-ID-10-18-14.pdf>the5th
Circuit's stay
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141014-5th.pdf>.
In real-person, that means that despite a full trial leading to a
147-page opinion finding the Texas ID law unconstitutional, the law will
be in place for this November's election. Justice Ginsburg, joined by
Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, strongly dissented from the Court's
decision to let the law stay in place for now.
The ultimate fate of the law is still TBD. The trial court struck it
down, and the appellate courts have pressed pause on that ruling, but
they have not overturned it. After the election, the case will proceed
to the 5th Circuit for review on the merits.
More to come.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67060&title=And%20Now%2C%20a%20Ruling%20on%20Texas%20ID&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,election law and constitutional law
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=55>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
We've Got a Supreme Court Ruling On a Temporary Pause...
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67058>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 2:34 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67058>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
... but not on the Texas ID case.
Here <http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/101714zr1.pdf>, the
Court denies an emergency injunction in/French v. McLean/, the case
about Montana'sban on partisan judicial endorsements
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66893>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67058&title=We%E2%80%99ve%20Got%20a%20Supreme%20Court%20Ruling%20On%20a%20Temporary%20Pause%E2%80%A6&description=>
Posted injudicial elections
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
Tool to Track Independent Spending and Candidate Spending
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67055>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:39 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67055>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Anew tool
<http://cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/14-10-17/11_SENATE_9_HOUSE_RACES_TOP_1_MILLION_IN_INDEPENDENT_SPENDING_OVER_THE_PAST_7_DAYS_ALONE.aspx>from
the Campaign Finance Institute tracks data on candidate spending and
independent spending for the U.S.Senate
<http://cfinst.org/data/2014_Senate_Independent.aspx>andHouse
<http://cfinst.org/data/2014_House_Independent.aspx>, drawing daily
reports from the FEC.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67055&title=Tool%20to%20Track%20Independent%20Spending%20and%20Candidate%20Spending&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"Election Officials Prepare for the Unexpected"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67053>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67053>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Finally, the election-Ebola crossover we've been waiting for. The
newestElectionlineWeekly awaits
<http://www.electionline.org/index.php/electionline-weekly>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67053&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Officials%20Prepare%20for%20the%20Unexpected%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"How Billionaire Oligarchs Are Becoming Their Own Political Parties"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67051>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67051>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Jim Rutenbergtakes an extended trip
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/how-billionaire-oligarchs-are-becoming-their-own-political-parties.html>into
the world of Tom Steyer and his colleagues for the NY Times Magazine.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67051&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Billionaire%20Oligarchs%20Are%20Becoming%20Their%20Own%20Political%20Parties%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"Courting Corruption: The Auctioning of the Judicial System"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67049>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:33 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67049>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Norm Ornstein, in the Atlantic, onjudicial elections and campaign
finance
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/courting-corruption-the-auctioning-of-the-judicial-system/381524/?single_page=true&utm_source=digg&utm_medium=email>after/Citizens
United/.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67049&title=%E2%80%9CCourting%20Corruption%3A%20The%20Auctioning%20of%20the%20Judicial%20System%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
Texas ID documents at the Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67047>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:33 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67047>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
A redacted version ofTexas's response
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/14A393-Texas-brief-in-opp-10-16-14.pdf>to
the planitiffs' application for vacating the 5^th Circuit's stay, and a
replyhere
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/14A393-Veasey-reply-brief-10-16-14.pdf>from
some of the plaintiffs. The inimitable Lyle Denniston, as always,has
more
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/texas-sees-no-emergency-on-voter-id-law/>at
SCOTUSblog.
We're now waiting on word from the Court.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67047&title=Texas%20ID%20documents%20at%20the%20Supreme%20Court&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>
International Campaign Finance Guide
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67045>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:32 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67045>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
International IDEA has published "Funding of Political Parties and
Election Campaigns: A Handbook on Political Finance
<http://www.idea.int/publications/funding-of-political-parties-and-election-campaigns/index.cfm>,"
looking at the campaign finance structures of systems across the globe.
You'll find the US in the chapter on "The Established Anglophone
Democracies," which may give just a flavor of the book's scope.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67045&title=International%20Campaign%20Finance%20Guide&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
The AP Bulks Up in a Big Way on Redistricting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67043>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:32 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67043>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
With four different stories.
Juliet Williamsdescribes the structure
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/c824a02c9bb446d9a234431df2d7bed1/results-independent-redistricting-are-mixed>of
redistricting in the states that take the process out of the hands of
the legislature -- an issue up at the Supreme Court this year, in a case
out of Arizona. Each state's process is a bit different, and put in
place to achieve slightly different ends.
Stephen Ohlemacher's "Congressional Redistricting 101
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/541a7ee1acac4de7af51aa363adae74c/congressional-redistricting-101>"
describes how the other states do the job.
Ohlemacher'spiece on the partisan politics
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/230f5be27f11416c9d76a257825e66c8/6-states-show-how-gop-tilted-house-playing-field>of
the process then talks about the partisan results.
And then a joint piece by Ohlemacher and Donna Cassata -- "GOP Has a
Built-In Advantage in Fight for US House
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/5418cb982e6f42ee8d5c7c1e7a44cf5d/gop-has-built-advantage-fight-us-house>"
wraps up the conclusion.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67043&title=The%20AP%20Bulks%20Up%20in%20a%20Big%20Way%20on%20Redistricting&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
"The Undemocratic Flaw In This State"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67041>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67041>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
A college juniorweighs in on redistricting in Maryland
<http://www.diamondbackonline.com/opinion/article_f9e418ae-54d4-11e4-82ad-001a4bcf6878.html>,
with more sophistication than I see from an awful lot of more
experienced analysts.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67041&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Undemocratic%20Flaw%20In%20This%20State%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
"Who's Afraid of 'Rocky Mountain Heist'?"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67039>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67039>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
That's the question Michelle Malkin asksin a new post
<http://www.vdare.com/articles/campaign-finance-laws-vs-the-first-amendment-whos-afraid-of-rocky-mountain-heist>on
the newCitizens United case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66911>in
Colorado.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67039&title=%E2%80%9CWho%E2%80%99s%20Afraid%20of%20%E2%80%98Rocky%20Mountain%20Heist%E2%80%99%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
Money in Politics as a Campaign Issue
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67037>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67037>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Paul Blumenthal thinks that the issue isgetting more prominent debate
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/17/2014-money-in-politics_n_5998854.html>this
cycle, particularly in Senate races, than it has in the past.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67037&title=Money%20in%20Politics%20as%20a%20Campaign%20Issue&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"Voting Rights Advocates Say Florida Should Lift Restrictions on
Felons Voting" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67035>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67035>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Areport
<http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/palm-beach/fl-voting-felons-palm-20141016-story.html>in
the Sun-Sentinel.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67035&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20Rights%20Advocates%20Say%20Florida%20Should%20Lift%20Restrictions%20on%20Felons%20Voting%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted infelon voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=66>
"Justice Minister Red-faced Over Alleged Election Law Violation"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67033>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:30 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67033>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Just for perspective: areport from Japan
<http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/10/17/national/politics-diplomacy/justice-minister-red-faced-alleged-election-law-violation/#.VEFQwSJ4pdA>.
First, that an official could be "red-faced" at all over an election law
violation. But second, on the allegation itself: that an official broke
the law against giving "goods of a certain value to voters" by
distributing paper fans with campaign ads.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67033&title=%E2%80%9CJustice%20Minister%20Red-faced%20Over%20Alleged%20Election%20Law%20Violation%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
A New Way to Sort Through Ballot Propositions
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67031>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:30 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67031>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
California is (in)famous for its direct democracy, with a hefty portion
of each cycle's ballot devoted to initiatives that are often long and
complicated. Here's a new way to understand what's what:video reviews of
the major arguments pro and con
<http://roseinstitute.org/research-overview/video-voter/>, done by the
students at theRose Institute <http://roseinstitute.org/>at Claremont
McKenna.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67031&title=A%20New%20Way%20to%20Sort%20Through%20Ballot%20Propositions&description=>
Posted indirect democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>
The Impact of Top-Two <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67029>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:29 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67029>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
KQEDspends an hour <http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201410160900>on the
consequences of California's top-two primary.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67029&title=The%20Impact%20of%20Top-Two&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,political polarization
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
"Voter Primacy" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67027>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:29 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67027>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Professor Sarah Haan compares theinformational interests of voters and
shareholders <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2501786>in corporate campaign
finance disclosure after/Citizens United/.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67027&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20Primacy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
"In Defense of Private Civic Engagement"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67025>
Posted onOctober 17, 2014 10:29 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67025>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Nick Dranias, in turn,looks into a right to anonymity
<http://ssrn.com/abstract=2501105>.
The right to private civic engagement --- the right to participate
in politics confidentially as an individual or in association with
others --- is under assault as the product of "dark money." But the
attack on "dark money" is really an effort to suppress opposing
ideologies by exposing speakers and their associates to retaliation.
Unfortunately, current Supreme Court precedent is enabling and
emboldening such suppression. But there is hope for a return to our
Nation's tradition of respect for private speech and association.
Mandatory disclosure and disclaimer requirements are still subject
to an exception for those who can claim a reasonable probability of
retaliation. Sadly, in today's polarized political environment, it
is increasingly apparent that this exception should be the rule. A
focused litigation strategy can help usher this recognition into
wider acceptance by the judiciary. Moreover, states can assist in
protecting private civic engagement by enacting the proposed Free
Speech Privacy Act, which would codify the right to be free from
disclosure and disclaimer mandates that impose a reasonable
probability of retaliation. Furthermore, states can enact the
proposed Publius Confidentiality Act, which would guarantee
citizens, who legitimately fear retaliation, the right to secure a
confidential identity for use in their political activities. These
proposed tactics are fully constitutional under current precedent
and will also help move the debate towards once again recognizing
the fundamental importance of private civic engagement in our Republic.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67025&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Defense%20of%20Private%20Civic%20Engagement%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
The "Esquire" Commission to Fix Congress
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67020>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 3:02 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67020>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
I'm not kidding
<http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/how-to-fix-congress-now-1114>.
Tom Daschle, Trent Lott, Bob Livingston, Barney Frank, Alan Frumin,
Lawrence O'Donnell. Gentlemen of distinction, all. With "22 simple
reforms that could #fixcongress right now
<http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/congress-the-report-reforms-fixcongress-1114>."
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67020&title=The%20%E2%80%9CEsquire%E2%80%9D%20Commission%20to%20Fix%20Congress&description=>
Posted inpolitical polarization <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>
"Voter ID Firebrand Takes a Low-Profile Kansas Office Out of the
Shadows" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67018>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:58 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67018>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
The New York Times profilesSec. Kris Kobach
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/17/us/politics/voter-id-firebrand-kris-kobach-takes-a-low-profile-kansas-office-out-of-the-shadows.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67018&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Firebrand%20Takes%20a%20Low-Profile%20Kansas%20Office%20Out%20of%20the%20Shadows%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
"Phila. Ethics Board Tightens Campaign-Finance Rules"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67015>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67015>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Philadelphia municipal rules now consider thereuse of campaign-produced
materials
<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20141016_Campaign_spending_rules_tightened_as_Philly_mayor_s_race_nears.html>to
be an in-kind contribution. You might remember this controversy from
such episodes as #McConnelling <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=59452>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67015&title=%E2%80%9CPhila.%20Ethics%20Board%20Tightens%20Campaign-Finance%20Rules%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Uncategorized
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"Voter ID Facts and Motivation: Easterbrook v. Posner"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67013>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:52 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67013>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Bauerfinds the difference
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2014/10/voter-id-facts-motivation-easterbrook-v-posner/>between
Judges Easterbrook and Posner (and the difference between/Crawford/and
the instant Wisconsin struggle) to be their consideration of legislative
motive.
Maybe. But I think there's (perhaps also) a difference between the
quality of the factual record. Too little has been made, I think, of
the role of the trial court in actually weighing evidence. The trial
court found the evidence submitted in Indiana wanting, and the trial
court found the evidence submitted in Wisconsin persuasive ... but most
of the analysis thus far has either assessed the evidence as if it were
the same, or as if the evidence actually presented to the trial court
(and subject to cross-examination) didn't matter. Perhaps this is
related to the increasing (and not salutary) tendency of the appellate
courts to purport todo their own factfinding
<http://ssrn.com/abstract=2009904>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67013&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Facts%20and%20Motivation%3A%20Easterbrook%20v.%20Posner%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,election law and constitutional law
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=55>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
"40,000 Voter-Registration Applications Submitted by Blacks and
Hispanics Disappear in Ga." <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67011>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:44 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67011>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
The Root covers
<http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2014/10/_40_000_voter_registration_applications_submitted_by_black_and_hispanic.html>the
curious case ofmissing voter registration forms
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66687>in Georgia.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67011&title=%E2%80%9C40%2C000%20Voter-Registration%20Applications%20Submitted%20by%20Blacks%20and%20Hispanics%20Disappear%20in%20Ga.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voter registration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
"As Courts Debate Voter ID, Election Workers Prepare for Both
Outcomes" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67009>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:43 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67009>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
And Texas election officials arehedging their bets
<http://austin.twcnews.com/content/news/305504/as-courts-debate-voter-id--election-workers-prepare-for-both-outcomes/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67009&title=%E2%80%9CAs%20Courts%20Debate%20Voter%20ID%2C%20Election%20Workers%20Prepare%20for%20Both%20Outcomes%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>
Robocalls Out in WI: Bring Your ID <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67007>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:42 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67007>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Sometimesit takes a while
<http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/Robocalls-mentioning-voter-ID-requirements-likely-not-a-scam-279357002.html>to
bring the ship around. The Wisconsin ID lawmay be enjoined for this
election <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66998>, but not everyone's got
the message just yet.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67007&title=Robocalls%20Out%20in%20WI%3A%20Bring%20Your%20ID&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
Money in Politics 2030: Toward a New Jurisprudence
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67001>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:07 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67001>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
I had the great honor to participate inthis exceptional campaign finance
symposium <http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium>in
May. The NYU Law Review has now published papers associated with the
symposium, online. My own contribution
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/electoral-integrity-confidence-game>reflects
on the electoral integrity concept behind Robert Post's Tanner
Lectures,/Citizens Divided
<http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674729001>/, and the
differing roles of democratic theory and constitutional law.
But the symposium's contributions are both broad and deep, including
work byJohanna Kalb and Burt Neuborne
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium/introduction-building-first-amendment-friendly-democracy-or-democracy>,Yasmin
Dawood
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium/democracy-divided-campaign-finance-regulation-and-right-vote>,Deborah
Hellman
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium/response-political-participation-hybrid-sphere>,Joey
Fishkin and Heather Gerken
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium/two-trends-matter-party-politics>,Kate
Andrias
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-symposium/response-hollowed-out-democracy>,Ned
Foley
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/speaking-ballot-new-way-foster-equality-campaign-discourse>,Lisa
Manheim
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/response-nudging-ballot-response-professor-foley>,Rick
Hasen
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/response-electoral-integrity-dependence-corruption-and-whats-new>,Michael
Malbin
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/mccutcheon-could-lead-no-limits-political-parties-what>,Sam
Issacharoff
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/response-market-intermediaries-post-buckley-world>,
andCiara Torres-Spelliscy
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/democracy-we-left-behind-greece-and-mccutcheon>.
The Brennan Center is also hosting anongoing blog series
<http://www.brennancenter.org/money-politics-toward-new-jurisprudence>following
up on the thoughts raised at the symposium.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D67001&title=Money%20in%20Politics%202030%3A%20Toward%20a%20New%20Jurisprudence&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
7th Circuit Stays Mandate: WI ID Law Formally Blocked for This
Election <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66998>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:07 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66998>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Close watchers of the fight over Wisconsin's ID lawnoted last week
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66650>that there was a slight procedural
hiccup.
The trial court issued apermanent injunction
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/frankvwalker.pdf>blocking
the ID law. That decision was thenstayed by the 7^th Circuit
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/7th-wi-order.pdf>; the
7^th Circuit's stay, in turn, wasvacated by SCOTUS
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14a352_i42k.pdf>.
Separately, the 7^th Circuit also issued an orderreversing the trial
court on the merits
<http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2014/D10-06/C:14-2059:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1429869:S:0>;
though it seemed likely that the Supreme Court would similarly press
pause on that order, that order had not yet been blocked -- which meant
that technically, whenever the 7^th Circuit issued its mandate, the
Wisconsin ID law would be implemented for this election.
Yesterday, the 7^th Circuit formallyissued a stay of its own mandate
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/20141016-7th-cir.pdf>,
pending the disposition of a cert petition (or a failure to file such a
petition). That was the last technical shoe to fall, and it ensures
that the Wisconsin ID lawwillformally be blocked for this election.
After the election, the law will be back in place unless the Supreme
Court decides to hear the case and overturn the 7^th Circuit's decision
on the merits.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66998&title=7th%20Circuit%20Stays%20Mandate%3A%20WI%20ID%20Law%20Formally%20Blocked%20for%20This%20Election&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
"Keep Hands Off the GAB" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66996>
Posted onOctober 16, 2014 2:06 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=66996>byJustin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
Speaking of Wisconsin, Barry Burden, David Canon, Kenneth Mayer, and
Donald Moynihandefend Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/keep-hands-off-the-gab-b99371374z1-279367362.html>,
the regulatory body of former judges overseeing state elections, against
legislative attack. Yes, it's not directly accountable to the public or
incumbent politicians -- but that seems precisely the point.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D66996&title=%E2%80%9CKeep%20Hands%20Off%20the%20GAB%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
--
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/20141019/4e332913/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/20141019/4e332913/attachment.png>
View list directory