[EL] ELB News and Commentary 4/27/15

Mon Apr 27 07:43:27 PDT 2015

    "Republican Contenders Reach Out to Sheldon Adelson, Palms Up”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72050>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:41 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72050>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT reports. 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/us/politics/republican-contenders-reach-out-to-sheldon-adelson-palms-up.html?ref=politics>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72050&title=%E2%80%9CRepublican%20Contenders%20Reach%20Out%20to%20Sheldon%20Adelson%2C%20Palms%20Up%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

    No #SCOTUS Order Today in WI John Doe Case
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72048>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:36 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72048>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Although it was on Friday’s conference, there is no order in 
today’sO’Keefe v. Chisolm 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/okeefe-v-chisholm/>case, a 
case conservativeshave urged 
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/wisconsin-goes-to-the-supremes-1429744522>the 
Supreme Court to take. The case fits into the argument that 
conservatives are being harassed in campaign finance cases, and the 
debate around the raids associated with the John Doe investigation of 
potential illegal campaign finance activities in Wisconsin has generated 
a lot of heat.

What does it mean that there is no decision today?  It could mean a 
cert. grant in the next set of orders (the Court now tends to wait a 
second conference to vet cases to make sure they are suitable cases to 
be heard). It could mean there will be a cert. denial and one or more 
Justices will dissent or otherwise issue a statement respecting the 
denial of cert. Or it could mean nothing.  We’ll just have to wait and see.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72048&title=No%20%23SCOTUS%20Order%20Today%20in%20WI%20John%20Doe%20Case&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

    “Jeb Bush tells his donors they’ve helped make history”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72046>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:30 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72046>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports. 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/04/26/jeb-bush-tells-his-donors-theyve-helped-make-history/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72046&title=%E2%80%9CJeb%20Bush%20tells%20his%20donors%20they%E2%80%99ve%20helped%20make%20history%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

    “How SuperPacs Can Run Campaigns” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72044>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:27 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72044>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT editorial, 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/opinion/how-super-pacs-can-run-campaigns.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region>echoing 
my Slate piece of last week,Jeb the Destroyer 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/jeb_bush_destroying_campaign_finance_rules_his_tactics_will_be_the_future.html>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72044&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20SuperPacs%20Can%20Run%20Campaigns%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

    Jamie Raskin on Hillary Clinton and a Constitutional Amendment to
    Overturn Citizens United <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72042>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72042>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jamie in Salon: 
<http://www.salon.com/2015/04/27/scalia_and_roberts_dont_know_best_heres_how_we_take_our_politics_back_from_reactionary_court_and_billionaire_donors/>

    The country’s most prolific voting rights scholar and blogger,
    Richard Hasen—a colleague and friend of mine—is the most recent
    legal academic to pour cold water all over the movement for a
    constitutional amendment
    <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/hillary_clinton_and_campaign_finance_the_democratic_front_runner_s_suggestion.html> to
    rebuild the statutory wall protecting democratic elections from the
    flood of plutocratic and corporate wealth.  This is the wall that
    has been mostly demolished by the Roberts Court in both Citizens
    United and the McCutcheon decision….

    Thankfully there is no talk of hypocrisy in Hasen’s critique, but
    still all Clinton gets from him is a lot of negative energy.  First,
    he faults her for not trying to fix “the nation’s disclosure laws,”
    which is strange because she supported the Disclose Act, which U.S.
    Rep. Chris Van Hollen introduced and which Republicans killed, and
    she has always championed disclosure.  It is also strange because
    Clinton is clearly treating a constitutional amendment as a /last
    resort/ in a struggle against a runaway faction of five plutocrats
    on the Supreme Court.  If I am reading her correctly, Clinton wants
    unaccountable corporate money—which is now spent by CEOs in our
    political campaigns on a secret basis and without any consumer,
    shareholder or citizen control over it—to be subject to public
    regulation “even if it takes” a constitutional amendment. That
    doesn’t sound so reckless to me.

    For Hasen, it seems sufficient to work for years or decades to
    mandate disclosure of the billions of dollars in corporate money
    coursing through the veins of the body politic, and then leave
    things at that.  He is afraid that actually restoring the power of
    Congress to impose “reasonable” and viewpoint-neutral limits on
    corporate political expenditures would be subject to an effective
    judicial veto through reinterpretation by “a conservative majority
    on the Roberts Court” and therefore useless.  Well, it is also the
    case that the addition of the words “equal protection” to the
    Constitution were effectively nullified through reinterpretation by
    a Jim Crow Supreme Court between Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown
    v. Board of Education(1954). But does that make passage of the
    Fourteenth Amendment a bad idea?  The Supreme Court has been a
    conservative and reactionary institution for most of our history,
    but that is precisely the reason for the people to write our
    Constitution in a way that advances and protects strong democracy.
    Having the right constitutional language in place may not be
    /sufficient/ to constrain the reactionary elitism of the Supreme
    Court, but it is certainly /necessary./

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72042&title=Jamie%20Raskin%20on%20Hillary%20Clinton%20and%20a%20Constitutional%20Amendment%20to%20Overturn%20Citizens%20United&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

    Quote of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72040>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:24 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72040>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

    “What seems like really big money is less than a yacht,” Gingrich
    said in an interview. Wealthy donors could decide that “this year,
    instead of buying a new yacht, I’m going to spend $70 million on a
    candidate,” he said.

–Newt Gingrich, quoted in WaPo’sNever Before Have So Many People With So 
Much Money Run for President 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/why-the-2016-gop-race-may-be-more-like-2012-than-the-party-hoped/2015/04/26/fff662c8-e9f9-11e4-9767-6276fc9b0ada_story.html?postshare=3761430143553670>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72040&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

    “Think Congress has a gerrymandering problem? It has nothing on
    Georgia.” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72038>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:23 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72038>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Aaron Blake 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/04/27/the-most-amazing-political-stat-youll-see-this-week/>for 
WaPo.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72038&title=%E2%80%9CThink%20Congress%20has%20a%20gerrymandering%20problem%3F%20It%20has%20nothing%20on%20Georgia.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>

    “Recommended Reforms to California’s Top Two”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72036>

Posted onApril 27, 2015 7:20 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72036>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

FairVote. 
<http://www.fairvote.org/research-reports/recommended-reforms-to-californias-top-two/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72036&title=%E2%80%9CRecommended%20Reforms%20to%20California%E2%80%99s%20Top%20Two%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inalternative voting systems 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>,political parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>

    “Gillibrand to push for national online voter registration”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72034>

Posted onApril 26, 2015 6:04 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72034>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Capital New York reports. 
<http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2015/04/8566767/gillibrand-push-national-online-voter-registration>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72034&title=%E2%80%9CGillibrand%20to%20push%20for%20national%20online%20voter%20registration%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

    “More local government transparency needed for Ohio campaign finance
    data: Beth Sebian (Opinion)” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72032>

Posted onApril 26, 2015 3:17 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72032>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Cleveland Plain Dealer oped 
<http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/04/more_local_government_transpar.html#incart_river>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72032&title=%E2%80%9CMore%20local%20government%20transparency%20needed%20for%20Ohio%20campaign%20finance%20data%3A%20Beth%20Sebian%20%28Opinion%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

    “Stop the Texas Gerrymander” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72030>

Posted onApril 25, 2015 5:41 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72030>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

San Antonio Express-News editorial. 
<http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/editorials/article/Stop-the-Texas-gerrymander-6222390.php>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72030&title=%E2%80%9CStop%20the%20Texas%20Gerrymander%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

    “Newly Elected Mayor Locked Out Of City Hall In Struggling St. Louis
    County Town” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72028>

Posted onApril 25, 2015 10:11 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72028>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

HuffPo reports. 
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/25/kinloch-mayor-betty-mccray_n_7140130.html?utm_hp_ref=tw>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72028&title=%E2%80%9CNewly%20Elected%20Mayor%20Locked%20Out%20Of%20City%20Hall%20In%20Struggling%20St.%20Louis%20County%20Town%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

    Clinton’s Campaign Finance Push as a Way to Inoculate Herself from
    Charges Related to Her Lack of Transparency?
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72026>

Posted onApril 25, 2015 8:24 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72026>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

John Dickerson 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/hillary_clinton_may_have_a_hard_time_talking_campaign_finance_her_family.html>:

    This campaign finance pillar of the Clinton campaign appears to be
    weakened already, but some campaign finance advocates were skeptical
    that Clinton was ever going to have a big fight over campaign
    finance reform as she pledged, seeing the policy gambit as a way
    to inoculate herself from the questions raised by donations to her
    family foundation. We’ll see in the coming months if she takes on
    this cause. She’s got to get off defense first.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72026&title=Clinton%E2%80%99s%20Campaign%20Finance%20Push%20as%20a%20Way%20to%20Inoculate%20Herself%20from%20Charges%20Related%20to%20Her%20Lack%20of%20Tranparency%3F&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

-- 
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/20150427/d86b480a/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/20150427/d86b480a/attachment.png>