[EL] more news 4/20/15

Mon Apr 20 08:09:23 PDT 2015

    #SCOTUS Remands North Carolina Racial Gerrymandering Case for
    Reconsideration <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71867>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 8:08 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71867>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This order 
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/042015zor_8758.pdf>is 
unsurprising. Democrats and minority plaintiffs challenged a North 
Carolina redistricting plan as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. 
The North Carolina Supreme Court rejected the challenge. Today the 
Supreme Court told North Carolina to take another look in light of the 
Court’s recent decision raising similar issues in /Alabama Legislative 
Black Caucus v. Alabama/.  As I noted inmy SCOTUSBlog analysis 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/03/opinion-analysis-a-small-victory-for-minority-voters-or-a-case-with-profound-constitutional-implications/>of 
the /Alabama /opinion:

    What is the significance of today’s/Alabama/ruling? It seems likely
    on remand that at least some of Alabama’s districts will be found to
    be racial gerrymanders. This means that some of these districts will
    have to be redrawn to “unpack” some minority voters from these
    districts. But do not be surprised if Alabama preempts the lawsuit
    by drawing new districts which are less racially conscious but still
    constitute a partisan gerrymander which helps the Republicans have
    greater control over the Alabama legislative districts. As I have
    noted, lurking in the background of this case is the “race or party
    <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/>”
    problem: with most Democrats in Alabama being African Americans and
    most Republicans being white, how does one determine
    <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_redistricting_supreme_court_did_legislators_redraw_district_lines.html>whether
    a predominant factor in gerrymandering is race or party?

    On that score, the case may have somewhat broader implications even
    if not the earthshattering ones promised by Justice Scalia. Although
    Republican states which pack minority voters into districts can no
    longer claim to do so to comply with Section 5 of the Voting Rights
    Act (thanks to the/Shelby County/case), they still may claim to do
    so to comply with Section 2 of the Act. Indeed, asProfessor Justin
    Levitt has shown
    <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2487426>,
    minority packing and reliance on the Voting Rights Act have become a
    familiar tool for Republican legislatures looking to gain advantage
    by packing likely Democratic voters into a smaller number of
    districts. Many Democrats and minority voters have challenged such
    plans as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders.

    Today’s decision gives these challengers a new tool, making it
    harder for states to use compliance with the Voting Rights Act as a
    pretext to secure partisan advantage. All in all, this may help stop
    some egregious gerrymanders, but there will still be plenty of ways
    for states to draw district lines for partisan advantage without
    running afoul of the Voting Rights Act. And depending upon how the
    Court decidesthe Arizona redistricting case
    <http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/arizona-state-legislature-v-arizona-independent-redistricting-commission/?wpmp_switcher=desktop>later
    this Term, states may have even a freer hand to draw lines for
    nakedly political purposes.

I will have more on the significance of the /Alabama /ruling soon.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71867&title=%23SCOTUS%20Remands%20North%20Carolina%20Gerrymandering%20Case%20for%20Reconsideration&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting 
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

    “Constitutional & Criminal Law Experts File Brief Defending Gov.
    Rick Perry — First Amend. & Other Defenses Raised”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71865>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 7:52 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71865>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ron Collins blogs. 
<http://concurringopinions.com/archives/2015/04/fan-56-1-first-amendment-news-constitutional-criminal-law-experts-file-brief-defending-gov-rick-perry-first-amend-other-defenses-raised.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71865&title=%E2%80%9CConstitutional%20%26%20Criminal%20Law%20Experts%20File%20Brief%20Defending%20Gov.%20Rick%20Perry%20%E2%80%94%20First%20Amend.%20%26%20Other%20Defenses%20Raised%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

    Good Draw of Judges for Challengers in Texas Voter ID Appeal in 5th
    Circuit <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71863>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 7:34 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71863>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

ViaMichael Li <https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/590159884596940800>, 
here is theorder. <http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/clerk/calendar/1505/35.htm>

Chief Judge Carl Stewart (a Clinton appointee profiledhere 
<http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/meet_the_chief_judge_of_the_nations_most_divisive_controversial/>),Catharina 
Haynes 
<http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/nGetInfo?jid=3169&cid=999&ctype=na&instate=na>(a 
GWB appointee) and federal district court judgeNannette 
Brown<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nannette_Jolivette_Brown>(sitting by 
designation), an Obama appointee.

The 5th Circuit is among the most conservative courts in the nation. The 
idea that a panel would have two Democratic appointees must be 
heartening to the challengers in this case.  However, remember that 
Texas can try to take the case to the full 5th Circuit en banc if it 
loses, and given DOJ’s involvement and the high stakes here, this case 
is very likely to end up eventually before the Supreme Court.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71863&title=Good%20Draw%20of%20Judges%20for%20Challengers%20in%20Texas%20Voter%20ID%20Appeal%20in%205th%20Circuit&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>

    Quote of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71861>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 7:24 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71861>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

“I’ve told my six-year-old daughter, ‘Running for office is real simple: 
you just surgically disconnect your shame sensor.’ Because you spend 
every day asking people for money. You walk up and say, ‘How are you 
doing, sir? Can I have money? Great to see you, lovely shirt, please 
give me money.’ That’s what running for office is like.”

–Sen. Ted Cruz. 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/ted-cruz-2016-second-amendment-gun-rights-117133.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71861&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

    “An Uprising for Campaign Finance Reform?”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71859>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 7:20 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71859>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bauer blogs. 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/04/uprising-campaign-finance-reform/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71859&title=%E2%80%9CAn%20Uprising%20for%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reform%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

    “Rapid Rise in Super PACs Dominated by Single Donors”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71857>

Posted onApril 20, 2015 7:20 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71857>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

ProPublica reports. 
<http://www.propublica.org/article/rapid-rise-in-super-pacs-dominated-by-single-donors> “A 
growing number of political committees known as super PACs have become 
instruments of single donors, according to a ProPublica analysis of 
federal records. During the 2014 election cycle, $113 million – 16 
percent of money raised by all super PACs – went to committees dominated 
by one donor. That was quadruple their 2012 share.”

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71857&title=%E2%80%9CRapid%20Rise%20in%20Super%20PACs%20Dominated%20by%20Single%20Donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

-- 
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
hhttp://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/20150420/0ea3baa2/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/20150420/0ea3baa2/attachment.png>