[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/3/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Aug 3 07:48:10 PDT 2015
“John Roberts has been trying to gut the Voting Rights Act for
decades” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74848>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:46 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74848>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Scott Lemieux
<http://theweek.com/articles/568963/john-roberts-been-trying-gut-voting-rights-act-decades>at
The Week.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74848&title=%E2%80%9CJohn%20Roberts%20has%20been%20trying%20to%20gut%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20for%20decades%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Jeb Bush super PAC gets love from D.C., Florida lobbyists”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74846>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74846>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo reports
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/08/03/jeb-bush-super-pac-gets-love-from-d-c-florida-lobbyists/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74846&title=%E2%80%9CJeb%20Bush%20super%20PAC%20gets%20love%20from%20D.C.%2C%20Florida%20lobbyists%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Symposium: Evenwel v. Abbott and the Constitution’s big data
problem” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74844>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:40 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74844>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nate Persily’s contribution
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/08/symposium-evenwel-v-abbott-and-the-constitutions-big-data-problem/>to
SCOTUSBlog’s Evenwel v. Abbott symposium:
These points concerning the inaccuracy and variability of the
potential alternative data sources for redistricting will likely
receive less attention in/Evenwel/than familiar constitutional
arguments concerning the proper interpretation of the Fourteenth
Amendment. But these seemingly technical and logistical issues
should foreclose the constitutional debate. Current data on
citizenship or on registered voters is simply too inaccurate or
contested to be used in redistricting.Unless the Justices are
prepared to mandate a new kind of “citizen census” or to
constitutionalize the voter registration process, then they should
leave it to the states to draw their districts using the most
accurate data available
<http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/the-supreme-courts-big-data-problem-118568.html#.VaH6ORaa-kl>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74844&title=%E2%80%9CSymposium%3A%20Evenwel%20v.%20Abbott%20and%20the%20Constitution%E2%80%99s%20big%20data%20problem%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Quote of the Day–Jeb the Destroyer Edition
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74842>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74842>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
“Money helps. I’m playing by the rules of the game the way it’s laid
out,” said Bush, who worked with the political committees before
officially becoming a candidate. He also sent several of his former
top advisers to outside groups to manage the unlimited cash
machines. “If people don’t like it, that’s just tough luck,” he added.
—Jeb Bush
<http://time.com/3981626/jeb-bush-campaign-republican-money/>to
Politico’s Mike Allen, as quoted by Time, and the Koch Bros. Suck-Up Fest
On why Jeb is lying that he’s playing by the rules of the game, see
myJeb 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>piece.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74842&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day%E2%80%93Jeb%20the%20Destroyer%20Edition&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“67 donors and gusher of cash change 2016 race; Cruz, Huckabee,
others gain from unprecedented political buying power of wealthy
donors” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74840>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74840>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico reports.
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/wealthy-donors-and-gusher-of-cash-change-2016-race-120894.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74840&title=%E2%80%9C67%20donors%20and%20gusher%20of%20cash%20change%202016%20race%3B%20Cruz%2C%20Huckabee%2C%20others%20gain%20from%20unprecedented%20political%20buying%20power%20of%20wealthy%20donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“After Doe investigations, a chance for sensible reform”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74838>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:33 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74838>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/after-doe-investigations-a-chance-for-sensible-reform-b99545707z1-320284281.html>:
We urge Walker to form:
■A commission including members of both political parties to study
and recommend changes to state law that will promote transparency in
campaign donations while considering recent U.S. Supreme Court
decisions on political speech. In order to be effective, this must
be a public, bipartisan process. A Republican rewrite without
Democratic input will not inspire broad confidence that elected
representatives will put the public’s interest over their own or
those of special interests financing their campaigns.
■A blue ribbon task force to examine the state’s John Doe process
and to recommend changes. Although John Doe proceedings are
Wisconsin’s equivalent to a federal grand jury, people involved in
grand jury proceedings do not see their First Amendment rights to
free speech restricted to the degree they were during the Walker
investigations. Gag rules may make sense for a judge to order in
certain violent crime cases but likely never should apply to
investigations involving political speech.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74838&title=%E2%80%9CAfter%20Doe%20investigations%2C%20a%20chance%20for%20sensible%20reform%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Limits unclear on new political party ‘slush funds'; Inaction by
election cops gives Dems and Republicans free rein on spending”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74836>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:27 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74836>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CPI
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/08/03/17720/limits-unclear-new-political-party-slush-funds>:
The Democratic and Republican parties certainly don’t agree on how
to run the country, but they are in sync when it comes to
capitalizing on a new law letting them raise eight times as much
money from rich donors than before.
The new money technically must be used only for specific purposes,
such as legal expenses and improvements to party headquarters. The
limits are, however, murkier than they seem, with some lawyers
saying the money could legally pay for some election-related costs
such as opposition research and data mining.
And the Federal Election Commission, tasked with regulating and
enforcing federal campaign finance laws, is at an impasse over
whether and how to issue rules governing the new party accounts. As
a result, decisions about spending the money are pretty much up to
the parties and their lawyers.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74836&title=%E2%80%9CLimits%20unclear%20on%20new%20political%20party%20%E2%80%98slush%20funds%27%3B%20Inaction%20by%20election%20cops%20gives%20Dems%20and%20Republicans%20free%20rein%20on%20spending%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
“Unconstitutional But Entrenched: Putting UOCAVA and Voting Rights
for Permanent Expatriates on a Sound Constitutional Footing”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74834>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74834>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brian Kalt has postedthis draft
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2635510>on SSRN
(forthcoming, /Brooklyn Law Review/). Here is the abstract:
For decades, eligible voters who have left the U.S. permanently have
had the right to vote in federal elections as though they still
lived at their last stateside address. The federal law known as
UOCAVA forces their former states to let them vote for President,
Senate, and House this way. There are several serious constitutional
problems with this. Most problematic among them is that UOCAVA sits
in uneasy proximity to the continued disenfranchisement of U.S.
citizens who live in Washington, D.C., and the territories. Citizens
who move from a state to one of these places lose their right to
vote in federal elections (other than for President in D.C.). If
U.S. citizens who leave the country permanently have voting rights
that are so sacrosanct, it is odd that these other U.S. citizens,
living on U.S. soil, do not.
This Article provides some history and context on overseas voting,
explores the many reasons why UOCAVA’s enfranchisement of permanent
expatriates is unconstitutional, and considers why those
constitutional arguments have never seen the inside of a courtroom.
It concludes with some suggestions for reformulating UOCAVA to avoid
constitutional problems while duly respecting the entrenched voting
rights of permanent expatriates. While there are multiple options
that would be effective, the most plausible solution uses the
opportunity for constitutional reform created by the National
Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74834&title=%E2%80%9CUnconstitutional%20But%20Entrenched%3A%20Putting%20UOCAVA%20and%20Voting%20Rights%20for%20Permanent%20Expatriates%20on%20a%20Sound%20Constitutional%20Footing%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,military voting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=48>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Ruth: Vote, then pray your ballot is counted”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74832>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74832>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Daniel Ruth
<http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/ruth-vote-then-pray-your-ballot-is-counted/2239194>in
the Tampa Bay Times on FL SOS Ken Detzner:
Ken Detzner has other things to do, like protecting the state seal
to make sure it doesn’t get lost, fall into a mayo jar, or wind up
on Jameis Winston’s mantle. But it’s the election stuff that is the
primary item on Detzner’s agenda — when he gets around to it.
Yet on Detzner’s watch, voting in Florida has become an abacus
adventure as the secretary of state has plotted against voters by
engaging in a sloppy, ham-handed purge of voting rolls. Detzner also
opposed the use of remote dropoff points for mailed ballots.
But Detzner was just getting warmed up before vigorously opposing
online voter registration, which already has been successfully
implemented in many other states. He fretted that online
registration would unleash the “forces of evil” upon the electoral
process. And he might have had a point. Once you allow people to
register to vote online, the next thing you know people will start
registering to vote online.
Where does it end?
MORE
<http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2015/08/03/database-audit-puts-florida-sos-detzner-on-defensive-again-with-county-officials/>from
Doug Chapin.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74832&title=%E2%80%9CRuth%3A%20Vote%2C%20then%20pray%20your%20ballot%20is%20counted%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“The Question of Super PACs in the Post-Buckley World”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74830>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:21 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74830>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer blogs
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/08/question-super-pacs-post-buckley-world/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74830&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Question%20of%20Super%20PACs%20in%20the%20Post-Buckley%20World%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“The Voting Rights Act at 50 and the Section on Election Law at
Birth: A Perspective” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74828>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:20 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74828>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Gene Mazo has postedthis
abstract<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2635853>(no
draft) on SSRN (forthcoming ELJ):
On the fiftieth anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the
scholarly community has been fretting over the statute’s possible
demise. Two years after Shelby County v. Holder, many voting rights
scholars are still up in arms about the Supreme Court’s 2013
decision that rendered Section 5 of the VRA a dead letter. Section 5
had previously required covered jurisdictions to obtain federal
preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting
practices or procedures. But in Shelby County, the Court held that
the coverage formula of Section 4, which determined which states and
local governments were subject to preclearance based on their
histories of discrimination in voting, was unconstitutional. That
rendered Section 5 obsolete.
In the wake of Shelby County, voting rights scholars have scrambled
to understand the Court’s opinion and to craft a response. Some
scholars saw Shelby County as a deeply destabilizing decision that
implicated longstanding federalism and separations of powers
doctrines, with negative effects on matters of race and voting.
Others attacked the reasoning on which Shelby County was based,
especially Chief Justice John Roberts’s argument that there is a
“fundamental tradition of equal sovereignty” among the states which
preclearance violated, and his assertion that the coverage formula
was not congruent with proven voting rights violations.
Today, most scholars acknowledge that the prospects for adopting a
renewed Voting Rights Act are slim, not least because the
realignment of the Republican majority in Congress is less receptive
to the VRA than the Republicans were a decade ago. Thus, the
attention of election law scholars and voting rights advocates has
shifted — to laying the groundwork for a possible future Congress to
update the coverage formula of Section 4; to focusing on Section 2
as an alternative vehicle under which voting rights litigation can
be brought; and to devising other methods to encourage greater
participation in our elections by racial and ethnic minorities.
As the scholarly community has become more devoted to addressing the
barriers to voting and to salvaging what remains of the Voting
Rights Act, its efforts have been bolstered by the creation of the
new Section on Election Law within the Association of American Law
Schools, the umbrella organization that governs legal academics in
the United States. This is a reply to three papers that were
presented at the first-ever meeting of this new Section, which took
place in Washington, D.C., on January 4, 2015. It tries to take
stock of where we stand regarding the future of the Voting Rights
Act and also provides a history of the creation of the Section on
Election Law itself.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74828&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20at%2050%20and%20the%20Section%20on%20Election%20Law%20at%20Birth%3A%20A%20Perspective%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Appeal court’s John Doe decision” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74826>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74826>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Matthew Rothschild oped
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/appeal-courts-john-doe-decision-b99548315z1-320349301.html>in
the Journal Sentinel:
Special prosecutor Francis Schmitz has an obligation to appeal the
decision by the state Supreme Court to dismiss the John Doe
investigation. That decision legalized coordination between
candidates and outside groups so long as those groups don’t say
“vote for” or “vote against” a certain candidate.
Schmitz was investigating alleged coordination between Gov. Scott
Walker and several outside groups during the recall elections in
2011 and 2012, but the court ordered him to close down that
investigation.
Schmitz has two solid grounds for appealing that order to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
The first is that the conservative justices who ruled against him,
4-2, were biased and should have recused themselves.
The second is that those justices misread U.S. Supreme Court
precedents on campaign finance law and the First Amendment.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74826&title=%E2%80%9CAppeal%20court%E2%80%99s%20John%20Doe%20decision%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Wisconsin Decision to Shut Down Walker Probe Reflects Roberts
Court” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74824>
Posted onAugust 3, 2015 7:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74824>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NLJ oped
<http://www.nationallawjournal.com/home/id=1202733655885?kw=Op-Ed%3A%20Wisconsin%20Decision%20to%20Shut%20Down%20Walker%20Probe%20Reflects%20Roberts%20Court&cn=20150803&pt=Daily%20Headlines&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=National%20Law%20Journal&slreturn=20150703101539>by
Daniel Weiner and Brent Ferguson.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74824&title=%E2%80%9CWisconsin%20Decision%20to%20Shut%20Down%20Walker%20Probe%20Reflects%20Roberts%20Court%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“When Not All Votes Were Equal The U.S. Supreme Court reconsiders
how legislative districts are drawn—and risks sending the country
back to a time before ‘one person, one vote.'”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74822>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:49 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74822>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
J. Douglas Smith, author of /On Democracy’s Doorstep: The Inside Story
of How the Supreme Court Brought ‘One Person, One Vote’ to the United
State
<http://www.amazon.com/On-Democracys-Doorstep-Supreme-Brought/dp/0809074230>s,
/ has writtenthis piece on /Evenwel/in the Altantic.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/one-person-one-vote-a-history/399476/>
He concludes:
Until the Supreme Court sits for oral arguments and issues an
opinion in the Texas case now on its calendar, it is difficult to
discern the justices’ motives for weighing the meaning of “one
person, one vote.” Even if the Court decides that voters are a more
appropriate measure than persons, it is not clear which voters would
count. Eligible voters? Registered voters? Or actual voters? Given
the appallingly low voter turnout in the United States, such a
ruling could lead us back to a time when a relatively small number
of American citizens enjoyed disproportionate political power. Given
the Supreme Court’s recent assault on the Voting Rights Act and the
commitment of the majority to neutering its great accomplishments,
it is troubling to contemplate the Court’s motives. A decision in
favor of the challengers indeed has the potential to threaten many
of the gains that resulted from the reapportionment revolution of
the 1960s.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74822&title=%E2%80%9CWhen%20Not%20All%20Votes%20Were%20Equal%20The%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20reconsiders%20how%20legislative%20districts%20are%20drawn%E2%80%94and%20risks%20sending%20the%20country%20back%20to%20a%20time%20before%20%E2%80%98one%20person%2C%20one%20vote.%27%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Small Pool of Rich Donors Dominates Election Giving”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74794>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74794>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/small-pool-of-rich-donors-dominates-election-giving.html?ref=politics>:
[corrected link and bumped to top]
Fewer than four hundred families are responsible for almost half the
money raised in the 2016 presidential campaign, a concentration of
political donors that is unprecedented in the modern era.
The vast majority of the $388 million backing presidential
candidates this year is being channeled to groups that can accept
unlimited contributions in support of candidates from almost any
source. The speed with which such “super PACs
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>”
can raise money — sometimes bringing in tens of millions of dollars
from a few businesses or individuals in a matter of days — has
allowed them to build enormous campaign war chests in a fraction of
the time that it would take the candidates, who are restricted in
how much they can accept from a single donor.
Yup. It’sPlutocrats United.
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/ref=la_B0089NJCR2_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430416698&sr=1-7>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74794&title=%E2%80%9CSmall%20Pool%20of%20Rich%20Donors%20Dominates%20Election%20Giving%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Former news anchor joins race for Missouri secretary of state”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74818>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:34 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74818>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
KMBC
<http://www.kmbc.com/politics/former-news-anchor-joins-race-for-missouri-secretary-of-state/34496810>: “Robin
Smith, a longtime television news anchor in St. Louis, announced Sunday
that she will run for the Missouri Secretary of State’s
Office….Republican candidate Jay Ashcroft said he thinks Smith will
follow in the footsteps of Democratic secretaries of state Robin
Carnahan and Jason Kander, who he said used the office to advance a
liberal agenda and deny that voter fraud exists.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74818&title=%E2%80%9CFormer%20news%20anchor%20joins%20race%20for%20Missouri%20secretary%20of%20state%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Voting against discrimination: The crucial step America took 50
years ago to affirm its democratic values is under unprecedented
assault” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74816>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:30 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74816>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Theodore Shaw and Vishal Agraharkar write
<http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/shaw-agraharkar-voting-discrimination-article-1.2311288>for
the NYDN.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74816&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20against%20discrimination%3A%20The%20crucial%20step%20America%20took%2050%20years%20ago%20to%20affirm%20its%20democratic%20values%20is%20under%20unprecedented%20assault%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“How 2016 turned into a game for billionaires”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74814>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:28 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74814>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CBS’s Face the
Nation<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-2016-turned-into-a-game-for-billionaires/>with
Matea Gold, Steven Law, and Trevor Potter.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74814&title=%E2%80%9CHow%202016%20turned%20into%20a%20game%20for%20billionaires%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Journalists Attend Private Koch Brothers Gathering, But Agree Not
To Name Donors” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74812>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:19 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74812>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Michael Calderone reports
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/journalists-private-koch-brothers-donors_55bde43ee4b0b23e3ce30e48>for
HuffPo.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74812&title=%E2%80%9CJournalists%20Attend%20Private%20Koch%20Brothers%20Gathering%2C%20But%20Agree%20Not%20To%20Name%20Donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Rulings spark hopes for fairer districts”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74810>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:18 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74810>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Herald Tribune
<http://politics.heraldtribune.com/2015/08/02/rulings-spark-hopes-for-fairer-districts/>:
Since 2008, Florida has exhibited the political equivalent of a
split personality, with a Democratic president twice winning the
state even as Republicans racked up large majorities in the
Legislature and congressional delegation.
Among the explanations for the state’s alternating political
personas: Experts say it is one of the most gerrymandered in the
nation, with an array of oddly shaped political districts that —
evidence now shows — often were designed to maximize partisan advantage.
Now two blockbuster court cases — and a pair of constitutional
amendments that paved the way for them — are earning Florida a new
reputation as a state on the leading edge of efforts to rein in
political gamesmanship in drawing legislative districts.
Following a string of victories by voting rights groups seeking to
enforce provisions in the state constitution mandating compact
districts that are not drawn to favor political parties or
incumbents, Florida’s anti-gerrymandering campaign increasingly
looks like one of the more successful in the nation.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74810&title=%E2%80%9CRulings%20spark%20hopes%20for%20fairer%20districts%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
“Charles Koch invokes fight for civil rights as model for political
activism” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74808>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74808>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Soundspurely instrumenta
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/at-donor-meeting-charles-koch-urges-wealthy-conservatives-to-do-even-more/2015/08/02/8146b7f2-38d2-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html?hpid=z5>l
to me:
The theme of helping the lower class was echoed throughout the
weekend conference as network officials laid out their plans to
spend $889 million by the end of 2016 on issue advocacy,
higher-education grants and political activity. Huge banners
positioned around the halls of the resort featured quotes from
donors describing their commitment to helping the poor. Mark Holden,
the general counsel of Koch Industries, led a 40-minute discussion
Sunday afternoon on the network’s push for criminal justice reform
at the state and federal levels.
The emphasis appears to be driven by a sense among network officials
that they need to do more to win the public over to their cause,
including what they call “the middle third” of the electorate that
does not identify with their libertarian ideology. It underscores
one of the remaining challenges for the Koch political network, one
of the most potent forces in American politics: to recast its image
of being a political organ for the rich.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74808&title=%E2%80%9CCharles%20Koch%20invokes%20fight%20for%20civil%20rights%20as%20model%20for%20political%20activism%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“New ‘super PACs’ help 2016 mega-donors customize their political
clout” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74806>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:13 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74806>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
LAT
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-personal-super-pacs-20150802-story.html#page=1>:
The 2016 presidential race is already dominated by super PACs and
other groups that under federal law can take unlimited checks. In
Perry’s case, for example, the trio of super PACs account for nearly
all the money raised for his campaign so far, according to filings
with the Federal Election Commission.
More than 80% of the money came from just three donors, who put in a
total of $15.3 million. The largest sum, $6.3 million, came from
Kelcy Warren, an oil and gas pipeline billionaire from Dallas; an
additional $5 million came from another Dallas billionaire, Darwin
Deason. A $4-million contribution came in from a third donor whose
name has not been released.
Warren is not a typical, passive donor; he also serves as finance
chairman of Perry’s campaign. In February, Perry took a seat on the
board of directors of Warren’s firm, Energy Transfer Partners.
Warren was at a Washington hotel recently when Perry, appearing at
an Opportunity and Freedom event, gave a speech denouncing GOP rival
Donald Trump as a “barking carnival act” — and saying that the
nation needed to expand energy production and end a ban on energy
exports….
Another potential risk is tripping over the rules that ban
coordination. David Keating, president of the Center for Competitive
Politics, which advocates removing restrictions on campaign
spending, says he thinks Warren’s roles as Perry’s finance chairman
and mega-donor risk violating those rules. Violations could happen,
he said, if Warren were privy to campaign information and then got
involved in making decisions for the PAC.
“If he’s someone who’s a finance chair for the campaign, it wouldn’t
be a very good move for him to do anything else except give money,”
Keating said. “He might not know of any intentions or plans for the
campaign, but I think people might have a hard time believing that.”
Stefan C. Passantino, a campaign finance lawyer in Washington, set
up the Cruz and Perry super PACs. Having donors to a super PAC be
involved in raising money creates no problem, he said — so long as
no one shares inside strategic information.
“The campaign can’t tell the super PAC what their plans are on
spending or on public communications,” Passantino said. “Being the
finance director in the room isn’t anywhere close to that.
“It’s not an issue.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74806&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20%E2%80%98super%20PACs%E2%80%99%20help%202016%20mega-donors%20customize%20their%20political%20clout%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“The Next Wave of Court Challenges to Obama’s Legacy—Part One: The
Meaning of King v. Burwell” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74804>
Posted onAugust 2, 2015 8:08 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74804>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Simon Lazarusblogs
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-next-wave-of-court-challenges-to.html>.
Here arePart II
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-next-wave-of-court-challenges-to.html>andPart
III
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-next-wave-of-court-challenges-to_2.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74804&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Next%20Wave%20of%20Court%20Challenges%20to%20Obama%E2%80%99s%20Legacy%E2%80%94Part%20One%3A%20The%20Meaning%20of%20King%20v.%20Burwell%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted instatutory interpretation <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21>
Preview of Brennan Center Report on Outside Money in 2016 Early
Presidential Election Fundraising <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74800>
Posted onAugust 1, 2015 11:52 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74800>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here
<https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/early-presidential-fundraising-dominated-outside-groups>:
Screen Shot 2015-08-01 at 11.51.29 AM
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2015-08-01-at-11.51.29-AM.png>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74800&title=Preview%20of%20Brennan%20Center%20Report%20on%20Outside%20Money%20in%202016%20Early%20Presidential%20Election%20Fundraising&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“50 years after the Voting Rights Act, election law expert assesses
its impact and recent changes” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74798>
Posted onAugust 1, 2015 11:21 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74798>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
KC Star: <http://www.kansascity.com/living/article29566339.html>
Black men had been granted the right to vote in 1870 in the 15th
Amendment, which said people should be allowed to vote regardless of
their race or previous condition of slavery.
But soon after Reconstruction, which ended in 1877, Southern states
started passing laws that imposed conditions on the right to vote,
including so-called literacy tests and poll taxes, according to
attorney Mark Johnson, a partner atDentons law
firm<http://www.dentons.com/>in Kansas City.
Johnson, who teaches election law at the University of Kansas School
of Law, sat down with The Star at his office at 45th and Main
streets to discuss the legacy of the Voting Rights Act almost 50
years later — a law that still has resonance for new U.S. citizens —
and how some of its gains have eroded in the past five years.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74798&title=%E2%80%9C50%20years%20after%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%2C%20election%20law%20expert%20assesses%20its%20impact%20and%20recent%20changes%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Election officials should welcome voting audit”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74796>
Posted onAugust 1, 2015 11:15 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74796>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lawrence-Journal Worldeditorial
<http://www.emporiagazette.com/opinion/article_92725621-526b-51e9-8988-e52c30739841.html>:
Secretary of State Kris Kobach and election officials in Sedgwick
County should welcome an audit that would compare election results
reported by voting machines in that county with the paper backup
that records each ballot cast on the machines. If these election
officials are concerned with protecting the accuracy and integrity
of Kansas elections, they should want to know for sure whether the
voting machines they are using are accurately recording the votes
being cast.
That’s why it’s hard to understand why the election officials are
forcing a Wichita State University mathematician to go to court to
obtain the paper records that would allow her to audit the
performance of the voting machines.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74796&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20officials%20should%20welcome%20voting%20audit%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Judge dismisses Shirley Abrahamson suit to regain chief justice
role” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74792>
Posted onAugust 1, 2015 7:04 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74792>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Wisconsin Journal-Sentinel
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/judge-dismisses-abrahamson-lawsuit-aimed-at-retaining-chief-justice-role-b99548513z1-320333371.html>:
A federal judge on Friday dismissed
<http://media.jrn.com/documents/Supreme+-+order.pdf>Shirley
Abrahamson’s lawsuit aimed at regaining her position as chief
justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Abrahamson and five people who voted for her at her last election as
chief justice sued shortly after voters this spring approved a
constitutional amendment that allows the court to elect who serves
as its chief. Previously, the job went to the justice with the most
seniority. Abrahamson had held the post since 1996.
In his order granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss, U.S.
District Judge James Peterson said it was not the federal court’s
place to decide Abrahamson’s claim of interpreting the amendment to
take effect only at the end of her current term in 2019.
“Constitutional provisions are drawn with broad strokes,” Peterson
wrote. “There is no requirement that a state, in restructuring its
government or the powers and duties of its officials by means of a
constitutional amendment, do so with super-clarity to protect the
interests of the officials or voters whose interests might be impaired.
“Unless its actions are plainly unconstitutional, Wisconsin has the
authority and autonomy to restructure its government without
interference from the federal government.”
The opinion begins:
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, once a sterling example among state
supreme courts, has hit a long rough patch, and it has become
notorious for the fractiousness of its members. With that history as
a backdrop, the state legislature in 2013 started the process of
amending the state constitution to change the method of selecting
the chief justice, from seniority to Case: 3:15-cv-00211-jdp
Document #: 127 Filed: 07/31/15 Page 1 of 35 2 election by a
majority of the sitting justices. Ratification of that amendment was
completed on April 7, 2015, when it was approved in a state-wide
referendum. The day after the referendum, then-Chief Justice Shirley
Abrahamson, with five citizens who had voted for her re-election in
2009, filed this lawsuit
We will see if Justice Abrahamson appeals. If she does, I don’t expect
she will have a better result higher up the food chain.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74792&title=%E2%80%9CJudge%20dismisses%20Shirley%20Abrahamson%20suit%20to%20regain%20chief%20justice%20role%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted injudicial elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
Read the Brief for Appellants in the Evenwel One Person, One Vote
Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74789>
Posted onAugust 1, 2015 7:01 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74789>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/POFR-Evenwel-Brief-of-Appellants-July-31-2015.pdf>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74789&title=Read%20the%20Brief%20for%20Appellants%20in%20the%20Evenwel%20One%20Person%2C%20One%20Vote%20Case&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Billionaires Put Their Stamp on 2016 Presidential Campaigns”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74787>
Posted onJuly 31, 2015 8:06 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74787>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ reports:
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/jeb-bush-super-pac-rakes-in-cash-from-billionaires-1438372919>
Billionaires are bankrolling the early days of the 2016 presidential
campaign to an unprecedented degree, with at least 40 of the
wealthiest Americans plowing $60 million into super PACs aligned
with the top tier of candidates.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74787&title=%E2%80%9CBillionaires%20Put%20Their%20Stamp%20on%202016%20Presidential%20Campaigns%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>
“‘Super PACs’ Spent Millions Before Candidates Announced, Filings
Show” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74785>
Posted onJuly 31, 2015 7:45 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74785>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Eric Lichtblau
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/01/us/politics/super-pacs-spent-millions-before-candidates-announced-filings-show.html?ref=politics>for
the NYT:
Acting as shadow campaigns, the political committees backing the
major presidential candidates supported them with tens of millions
of dollars in chartered planes, luxury hotel suites, opposition
research, high-priced lawyers and more, spending reports showed Friday.
Campaign disclosures filed with the Federal Election Commission
underscored just how far the candidates — particularlyJeb Bush
<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/15/us/elections/jeb-bush.html?inline=nyt-per>—
went in outsourcing many of their traditional campaign operations to
“super PACs
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>,”
which face much looser regulation.
The super PACs, which have dominated the fund-raising landscape so
far in the 2016 campaign, reported that they had raised a total of
at least $245 million so far this year, with individual donations of
a million dollars or more to Mr. Bush,Hillary Rodham Clinton
<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/13/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html?inline=nyt-per>,
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and others.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74785&title=%E2%80%9C%E2%80%98Super%20PACs%E2%80%99%20Spent%20Millions%20Before%20Candidates%20Announced%2C%20Filings%20Show%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Historic federal trial on voting rights ends; judge to issue
decision later this year” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74783>
Posted onJuly 31, 2015 7:40 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74783>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Winston-Salem Journal
<http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/judge-asks-pointed-questions-of-plaintiff-s-attorney-in-closing/article_5256f85b-76e6-5baa-870c-b5ba1119a268.html>:
Thomas Farr, one of the state’s attorneys, said in closing arguments
that the plaintiffs had not presented any evidence that the law is
racially discriminatory. He said North Carolina legislators have the
authority to enact changes to election law.
Schroeder asked Farr what the justification was in making the
election law changes. State Republican legislators said publicly
they wanted to restore public confidence in the election system and
stamp out potential voter fraud.
There is no evidence of widespread in-person voter fraud in North
Carolina or nationally. An expert for the plaintiffs testified that
North Carolina had only two verified cases of voter fraud out of 35
million votes cast in primary and presidential elections between
2000 and 2014.
Farr pointed to public statements made by state legislators but also
added that state Republican legislators had no obligation to offer
justification for House Bill 589. Alexander Peters, another of the
state’s attorneys, said this case was about policy changes that
North Carolina legislators have the authority to make. He said those
changes might cause some burdens on voters but that the law is
constitutional and not racist.
Farr argued that the law put North Carolina in the mainstream with
the rest of the country. How can House Bill 589 be discriminatory if
a significant number of states don’t have such voting practices,
such as same-day voter registration, Farr asked.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74783&title=%E2%80%9CHistoric%20federal%20trial%20on%20voting%20rights%20ends%3B%20judge%20to%20issue%20decision%20later%20this%20year%E2%80%9D&description=>
--
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/20150803/a3db238a/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/20150803/a3db238a/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen-Shot-2015-08-01-at-11.51.29-AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 122993 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150803/a3db238a/attachment-0001.png>
View list directory