[EL] Beyond Words

Fri Apr 24 10:39:37 PDT 2015

I would think that pro-reform folks would be the most concerned about any suggestion of the use of campaign finance laws to further political goals and the most aggressive about condemning even the appearance of impropriety in enforcement. Using these laws to take retribution on political enemies-or conducting an investigation in a way that suggests the appearance of retribution-completely undermines the purported anti-corruption and "restoring faith in government" justification for these laws in the first place. If people begin to see campaign finance laws as just a means of conducting a campaign using "lawfare," I can't think of anything that would make people more cynical or disillusioned about government.

So, I guess I'm confused as to why many who are pro-reform are so sanguine-if not outright supportive-about how the investigation in Wisconsin was conducted. At the very least, I would think they would have serious concerns that Chisholm's wife's political activity (especially after hearing condemnations of Ginni Thomas for so many years and Justice Thomas can't throw people in jail, impoverish someone with defense fees, or raid their homes) would undermine the appearance of propriety in the investigation. I would have thought that people would have insisted that any investigation into Governor Walker would be conducted by someone without any political or personal ties to his opposition and that once knowledge of the investigation and Chisholm's family connections and personal feelings became clear, they would have called for him to step aside and have the investigation conducted and concluded by someone who was viewed as more objective.

As Thurgood Marshall put it, "A scheme injecting a personal interest, financial or otherwise, into the enforcement process may bring irrelevant or impermissible factors into the prosecutorial decision and in some contexts raise serious constitutional questions."

Bill

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Smith, Brad
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 10:07 AM
To: Tyler Culberson
Cc: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Beyond Words

whoa boy. Maybe everyone should slow down.

Here is Stuart Taylor on the alleged "death threat": http://legalnewsline.com/news/252276-whistleblower-mulling-libel-suit-against-milwaukee-newspaper-over-death-threat-claim

What I would hope we could all agree on is that midnight raids in force were totally unnecessary in this case, and should call into question something -- Chisholm's motives; runaway, militarized police forces generally; the advisability of the John Doe procedure generally or its specific use here-- something.

Bradley A. Smith

Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault

   Professor of Law

Capital University Law School

303 E. Broad St.

Columbus, OH 43215

614.236.6317

http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx

________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Tyler Culberson [tylerculberson at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 12:15 PM
To: Steve Hoersting
Cc: law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Beyond Words
Steve,
What I find unpleasant is the fact that the police officer interviewed by Megyn Kelly, Michael Lutz, in the link you provide, along side Eric O'Keefe the head of Wisconsin Club for Growth, had issued a death threat<http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/source-who-accused-chisholm-of-vendetta-has-troubled-past-b99350187z1-274905441.html> to the prosecutor in question, John Chisholm - raising a certain level of concern over Lutz's credibility. Though, like all good FoxNews reporting, that information was not disclosed during the interview.

-Tyler

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Steve Hoersting <hoersting at gmail.com<mailto:hoersting at gmail.com>> wrote:
Gentlemen, none of this is pleasant. I grant you.

But if you say political retribution is a discussion irrelevant to the matter of remaking or "reforming" our speech protections, I'd say you have a lot to learn.

Steve

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Greenberg, Kevin <Kevin.Greenberg at flastergreenberg.com<mailto:Kevin.Greenberg at flastergreenberg.com>> wrote:
OK, I'm convinced.

Seriously, folks, can we focus our posts on relevant information and discussions.

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] On Behalf Of Steve Hoersting
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 11:19 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] Beyond Words

http://therightscoop.com/megyn-kelly-interviews-former-cop-who-says-he-knows-wisconsin-raids-were-politically-motivated/

A nod to Eric O'Keefe and the Officer for coming forward.

--
Stephen M. Hoersting

--
Stephen M. Hoersting

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

________________________________

Spam<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09OjR9adU&m=1717407cd4cc&t=20150424&c=s>
Phish/Fraud<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09OjR9adU&m=1717407cd4cc&t=20150424&c=p>
Not spam<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09OjR9adU&m=1717407cd4cc&t=20150424&c=n>
Forget previous vote<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09OjR9adU&m=1717407cd4cc&t=20150424&c=f>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150424/ffafe900/attachment.html>