[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/5/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Aug 5 06:28:37 PDT 2015
“Election Law’s Path in the Roberts Court’s First Decade: A Sharp
Right Turn But with Speed Bumps and Surprising Twists”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74958>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74958>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have postedthis
draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2639902>on
SSRN. It is still an early draft. Comments welcome! Here is the abstract:
The first decade of election law cases at the Supreme Court under
the leadership of Chief Justice Roberts brought election law down a
strong conservative path. Citizens United v. Federal Election
Commission freed corporate money in U.S. candidate elections and
opened up a deregulatory era increasingly dominated by nominally
independent “Super PACs.” Shelby County v. Holder eviscerated the
congressional regime codified in Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act
under which Congress required states and localities with a history
of racial discrimination in voting to obtain federal permission
before making a change in voting rules by proving that the change
would not make minority voters worse off. In its wake,
previously-covered jurisdictions have adopted a number of election
changes which no doubt have made minority voters worse off. In
Crawford v. Marion County Election Board the Court gave the green
light for state voter identification laws, despite a lack of
evidence that such laws are necessary to deter fraud or instill
voter confidence. Republican states have increasingly tightened
voting rules in Crawford’s wake. Finally, the Court will soon
consider whether to place new restrictions on application of the one
person, one vote rule which would hurt Latino representation and
strengthen rural and Republican power. The Court took the case,
Evenwel v. Abbott, despite having apparently resolved the legal
question it presents in 1966.
Nonetheless, the Roberts Court, while dominated by a majority of
five conservative Justices, has not gone as far right as it could
have or as some, including I, had predicted. In the campaign finance
arena, the Court has thus far refused to take cases to strike down
the ban on direct corporate contributions to candidates, or to
reopen the ability of political parties to take large “soft money”
contributions. It has not eliminated individual contribution limits,
even as Super PACs and other campaign groups undermine them. In the
voting rights arena, the Court so far has declined cases which would
further limit the scope of, or find unconstitutional, Section 2 of
the Voting Rights Act, a key remaining protection for minority
voters, and it has revived the racial gerrymandering cause of action
in a way which can help minority plaintiffs fight Republican
gerrymanders. Most recently, the Court surprisingly rejected the
opportunity to use the Elections Clause to kill independent
commission-based congressional redistricting and other electoral
reforms, and it upheld against First Amendment challenge a rule
barring judicial candidates from personally soliciting campaign
contributions.
In this Essay I describe the path of election law jurisprudence in
the Roberts Court and then consider two questions. First, what
explains why the Court, while shifting in a strongly conservative
direction, has not moved more extremely to the right? Second, what
options has the Court left for election reformers who are unhappy
with the strongly conservative, although not maximally conservative,
status quo?
On the first question, a combination of factors appears to explain
the trajectory and speed of the Roberts Court’s election law
decisions. The Roberts Court is fundamentally conservative, but for
jurisprudential, temperamental, or strategic reasons Justices
holding the balance of power appear to prefer incrementalism to
radical change. Mandatory appellate jurisdiction appears the best
way to force the Roberts’ Court’s hand, and it often but not always
leads to a conservative result. Nearly half of the Roberts Court’s
election cases came on mandatory jurisdiction. Progressives
meanwhile have limited the number of cases they present for Court
review to avoid adverse precedent. Finally, the five conservative
Justices are not monolithic in their views and are capable of
surprise, as evidenced by the recent Arizona redistricting decision,
in which Justice Kennedy joined with the Court’s liberals, and the
recent judicial elections case, in which Chief Justice Roberts
joined with the Court’s liberals.
On the second question, the Court has left very limited space for
reform in certain areas, such as campaign finance. Where the Court
has greatly constrained choice, only minor improvements are possible
absent a change in the Supreme Court’s personnel. In these areas,
the problem is not that reformers have a “romanticized” vision of
democracy; it is that the structural impediments erected by the
Court have hobbled meaningful reform efforts. In contrast, in areas
in which the Court has mostly left room for decentralized election
law approaches, such as in the arena election administration,
election fights are becoming both legal and political. Polarization
and decentralization have led to the emergence of “red state
election law” and “blue state election law,” with voting
restrictions increasingly enacted in many Republican-leaning states
but not Democratic-leaning states or states with mixed control.
Part I briefly describes the path of election law in the Roberts era
across key election law areas including campaign finance, voting
rights, and election administration. Part II explains why the
Roberts Court is deeply conservative but not consistently
maximalist. Part III considers the space for election reform in the
Roberts Court era and beyond.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74958&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Law%E2%80%99s%20Path%20in%20the%20Roberts%20Court%E2%80%99s%20First%20Decade%3A%20A%20Sharp%20Right%20Turn%20But%20with%20Speed%20Bumps%20and%20Surprising%20Twists%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,redistricting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Election Litigation Rate Inches Up, Still More Than Double Pre-2000
Levels <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74955>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:23 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74955>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’ve updated
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2639902>my count of
election litigation through 2013-and 14.
In the 2013-14 election season, the high rate of election litigation
the country has witnessed since/Bush v. Gore/increased slightly.[1]
<http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftn1>With 266 cases in 2013 and 302
cases in 2014, the post-2000 average of “election challenge”
litigation rises from 242.5 cases per year[2]
<http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftn2>to 248.5 per year. By contrast,
the pre-/Bush v. Gore/average was 94 cases per year.
[1] <http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftnref1>For the data through 2010,
and the methodology used to compute these figures, see
Hasen,/supra/note 6, at 327, & n.9 & Fig. 3 (2011). For 2011-12, see
Hasen,/supra/note 78, at 1871 & nn. 41-43. I have posted the 2013-14
data at [link to be provided].
[2] <http://electionlawblog.org/#_ftnref2>Hasen,/supra/note 78, at 1871.
elect-litig-2103-14
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/elect-litig-2103-14.png>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74955&title=Election%20Litigation%20Rate%20Inches%20Up%2C%20Still%20More%20Than%20Double%20Pre-2000%20Levels&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“First GOP Debate To Take Place In A State Where Access To Voting
Rights Is Getting Worse” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74953>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:18 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74953>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Alice Ollstein writes
<http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/05/3687203/voting-rights-act-anniversary-gop-debate/>for
Think Progress.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74953&title=%E2%80%9CFirst%20GOP%20Debate%20To%20Take%20Place%20In%20A%20State%20Where%20Access%20To%20Voting%20Rights%20Is%20Getting%20Worse%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“The Voting Rights Act at 50″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74951>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74951>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT editorial.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/opinion/the-voting-rights-act-at-50.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74951&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20at%2050%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Does America need to restore the Voting Rights Act?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74949>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:15 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74949>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Stephanie Condon writes
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-america-need-to-restore-the-voting-rights-act/>for
CBS News.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74949&title=%E2%80%9CDoes%20America%20need%20to%20restore%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Congress Has the Power to Improve Elections”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74946>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:09 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74946>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have writtenthis contribution
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/congress-has-the-power-to-improve-elections>for
the New York TimesRoom for Debate
forum<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century>on
the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act. A snippet:
When a state rolls back conveniences for voters and makes it more
burdensome to register and vote (as North Carolina did), or if a
state’s existing rules make voting onerous (as New York does, by
providing neither early voting nor absentee balloting), a state
should have to alleviate voter burdens unless the state proves it
has a good reason not to do so. Preventing voter fraud and building
voter confidence are both important state interests, but they
usually cannot justify laws that burden voters because these laws
tend to neither prevent fraud nor instill voter confidence.
Rollbacks like North Carolina’s, or strict voter ID requirements
like Texas’s (which afederal court held was motivated by race
discrimination
<http://www.texastribune.org/2015/04/28/appeals-court-scrutinize-voter-id-law/>)
have less to do with fraud prevention than with partisan politics.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74946&title=%E2%80%9CCongress%20Has%20the%20Power%20to%20Improve%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Ensuring Voting Rights in the 21st Century”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74944>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:07 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74944>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT Room for Debate
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century>asks
what’s next on the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act.
Contributions:
DEBATERS
*
Change from the Grass Roots
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/a-voting-rights-movement-is-whats-need-now>
Guy-Uriel CharlesGUY-URIEL CHARLES, DUKE UNIVERSITY ANDLuis
Fuentes-RohwerLUIS FUENTES-ROHWER, INDIANA UNIVERSITY
*
The Law Worked, and Now It’s Time to Move On
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/the-voting-rights-act-worked-and-now-its-time-to-move-on>
Abigail ThernstromABIGAIL THERNSTROM, FORMER VICE-CHAIRWOMAN,
COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
*
Racial Discrimination Is Only One Threat to Elections
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/racial-discrimination-is-only-one-threat-to-elections>
Jamal GreeneJAMAL GREENE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
*
Congress Has the Power to Improve Elections
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/congress-has-the-power-to-improve-elections>
Richard L. HasenRICHARD L. HASEN, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE
*
Latino Voters Continue to Be Disenfranchised
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/latino-voters-continue-to-be-disenfranchised>
Nina PeralesNINA PERALES, MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND
EDUCATIONAL FUND
*
Voting Rights Require Organization and Legislation
<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/08/05/ensuring-voting-rights-in-the-21st-century/voting-rights-require-organization-and-legislation>
Hasan Kwame JeffriesHASAN KWAME JEFFRIES, THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74944&title=%E2%80%9CEnsuring%20Voting%20Rights%20in%20the%2021st%20Century%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Scott Walker, GOP lawmakers want to change elections board by 2016″
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74942>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:05 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74942>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/scott-walker-gop-lawmakers-want-to-change-elections-board-by-2016-b99549665z1-320700941.html>
Gov.Scott Walker
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/scott-walker-290106981.html>and
Republicans who control the Legislature plan to restructure the
agency that runs elections by the fall of 2016, when Walker hopes to
top the ballot as a candidate for president.
GOP lawmakers also plan to rewrite campaign finance laws for state
candidates to put them in line with recent court decisions. As part
of that effort, they are considering at least doubling the amount of
money donors can give candidates, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos
(R-Rochester) said….
Daniel Tokaji
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/professor/daniel-p-tokaji/>, a
professor at the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University who
specializes in election law, called the accountability board a model
for the nation in a2013 review
<http://www.law.uci.edu/lawreview/vol3/no3/tokaji.pdf>.
He called the move to restructure the accountability board a
“partisan attack.”
“Such attempts at partisan manipulation of the election system are
no longer surprising,” he said by email. “The only surprise is how
ham-handed the state GOP has been about its goal of making
Wisconsin’s election system less fair.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74942&title=%E2%80%9CScott%20Walker%2C%20GOP%20lawmakers%20want%20to%20change%20elections%20board%20by%202016%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
CCP v. Harris Cert Petition <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74940>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:02 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74940>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read it here.
<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CCP-v.-Harris-Petition-for-Certiorari.pdf>
The question concerns whether CA AG Harris can have access to CCP’s
donor list for law enforcement purposes (and not for public disclosure)
or whether such access violates the First Amendment.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74940&title=CCP%20v.%20Harris%20Cert%20Petition&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Hillary Clinton’s Mega-Donors Are Also Funding Jeb Bush”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74938>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 6:00 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74938>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jackie Kucinich
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/04/hillary-clinton-s-mega-donors-are-also-funding-jeb-bush.html>for
the Daily Beast.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74938&title=%E2%80%9CHillary%20Clinton%E2%80%99s%20Mega-Donors%20Are%20Also%20Funding%20Jeb%20Bush%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“The Voting Rights Act and the Second Redemption”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74936>
Posted onAugust 5, 2015 5:57 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74936>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Kermit Roosevelt
<http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/08/the-voting-rights-act-and-the-second-redemption/>at
Constitution Daily.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74936&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20and%20the%20Second%20Redemption%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Bloomberg BNA on Republicans’ New Soft Money Suit
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74934>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 8:39 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74934>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ken Doyle
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=73682348&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0h0u4r0p3&split=0>:
[update:also here
<http://www.bna.com/new-challenge-filed-n17179934349/>without a
subscription]
*No Explanation of Timing*
The decision to renew the legal challenge to the BCRA soft-money
limits on behalf of the Louisiana Republicans—but not the RNC—may
reflect divisions within the party over how to proceed on campaign
finance issues.
Asked why a new case was being filed now after the previous legal
challenge was dropped, Bopp responded in an Aug. 4 e-mail to
Bloomberg BNA: “You will have to ask the RNC why they wanted to
dismiss their previous challenge.”
Last November, the RNC refused to provide an explanation when the
previous case was abruptly dropped. However, the move came shortly
after Republicans won electoral victories that gave them majority
control of both the House and Senate and appeared to reflect a
strategic shift away from such court challenges by at least some in
the party.
Some observers suggested that Republican leaders decided after last
November that they could compete and succeed in a campaign finance
system dominated less by parties and more by unlimited contributions
to super PACs and other organizations formally independent from the
political parties. At the same time, Republicans also have continued
to advocate for loosening campaign finance limits on the parties—if
not through court challenges, then through legislative proposals.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74934&title=Bloomberg%20BNA%20on%20Republicans%E2%80%99%20New%20Soft%20Money%20Suit&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,political
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
Looking More Like WI John Doe Claims of Harassment Exaggerated or
False <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74930>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 7:34 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74930>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Journal Sentinel <http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/320568172.html>:
An attorney for the two investigators submitted the audio file to
federal court on Monday.
*David Rivkin*, Archer’s lawyer, said in a statement that the audio
“confirms Ms. Archer’s account of that traumatic morning in every
relevant respect.” He called the investigation nothing more than a
“fishing expedition aimed at ensnaring Scott Walker.”
“Given the trauma of the day, it is not surprising that a victim of
these abuses may not remember every detail with perfect clarity,”
Rivkin said via email….
For instance, she said in her filing that officers stormed into her
house “throwing the (search) warrant at her without giving her an
opportunity to read it.”
According to the audio of the raid, Weiss spent nearly six minutes
reading the search warrant and the John Doe secrecy order to Archer
and her partner shortly after arriving at their house.
Archer’s suit also maintains that she agreed to talk to Weiss out of
fear and intimidation, not realizing she had a right to remain
silent or to have an attorney.
Again, however, Weiss is recorded specifically issuing a Miranda
warning to Archer and letting her know that she could have a lawyer
present if she wanted. Archer was also told she could stop answering
questions at any time.
“Realizing you have these rights, are you willing to talk with me
now?” Weiss asked.
“Yes,” Archer said.
What BS.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74930&title=Looking%20More%20Like%20WI%20John%20Doe%20Claims%20of%20Harassment%20Exaggerated%20or%20False&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Martin O’Malley to call for a voting rights constitutional
amendment” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74928>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 4:32 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74928>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CNN reports.
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/04/politics/martin-omalley-voting-rights-constitutional-amendment/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74928&title=%E2%80%9CMartin%20O%E2%80%99Malley%20to%20call%20for%20a%20voting%20rights%20constitutional%20amendment%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Slim turnout expected in next month’s NC primaries”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74926>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 4:26 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74926>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Charlotte Observer
<http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article29963316.html>:
To mark the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, Sunday’s New
York Times Magazine made North Carolina the focus for a sweeping
cover story on the 1965 law and the struggle both to create it and
preserve it.
The law signed 50 years ago Thursday outlawed the voter suppression
tactics of the Jim Crow era and for minorities opened the doors to
the polls and to representation.
The focal point of the article was a Winston-Salem courtroom, where
last week a federal judge heard final arguments in what could become
a landmark challenge to the state’s 2013 voting law. That law ended
same-day voter registration, cut the number of early-voting days
and, starting next year, requires voter IDs.
But it’s hard to escape the fact that both sides were fighting over
a fundamental right most people won’t exercise, especially this year.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74926&title=%E2%80%9CSlim%20turnout%20expected%20in%20next%20month%E2%80%99s%20NC%20primaries%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Scott Walker Aide’s Claim of Prosecutorial Abuse Refuted by New
Audio” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74921>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 2:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74921>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
PR Watch <http://www.prwatch.org/news/2015/08/12897/Walker-JohnDoe-tape>:
Scott Walker’s former top aide Cindy Archer has become the poster
child for allegations that state prosecutors investigating
corruption around Walker ran amok and engaged in aggressive,
unconstitutional “raids” on people’s homes.
Newly-released audio contradicts many of those claims.
In April, Archer was the star of a /National Journal/ article
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417155/wisonsins-shame-i-thought-it-was-home-invasion-david-french> called
“Wisconsin’s Shame” that spoke of “armed pre-dawn raids” and
screaming police with battering rams ransacking her home. The
article sparked a firestorm across right-wing media (including Fox
News
<http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/04/24/scott-walker-supporters-claim-police-raided-homes-over-politics/>)
and was even cited
<http://www.prwatch.org/news/2015/07/12887/five-things-know-about-scott-walker-john-doe-ruling> by the Wisconsin
Supreme Court as “proof” that prosecutors used “paramilitary style
raids” in conducting their investigations of Walker, even though the
searches were not being challenged and hadn’t been addressed before
the court.
In June, Archer announced in a /Wall Street Journal/ opinion piece
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-im-filing-a-civil-rights-lawsuit-1435694608> that
she was filing a civil rights lawsuit against state prosecutors. She
alleged prosecutors had a “personal vendetta” against her for
helping to craft Walker’s 2011 anti-union Act 10 legislation. Her
lawsuit describes a September 2011 search of her home where she
claims officers threw a search warrant at her without letting her
read it, screamed at her, ransacked her house, blocked her from
going outside to smoke, and didn’t inform her of her constitutional
rights or tell her she could speak with a lawyer.
Yet Archer’s allegations about overzealous prosecutorial tactics
fall apart in a recording of the 2011 search, filed by prosecutors
in response to her lawsuit and made public yesterday.
The search, which was led by experienced FBI agents, was taped by
Aaron Weiss, an investigator with the Milwaukee District Attorney’s
office. Although the first few minutes of the tape are muffled, the
three-hour long recording shows that the interaction
between Archer and the agents was quiet and cordial. The tapes
reveal Archer, her partner, and the agents joking, chatting
about dogs and aquariums, and discussing home repairs and
coffee-making techniques.
/(Listen to hours one, two, and three below.)/
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74921&title=%E2%80%9CScott%20Walker%20Aide%E2%80%99s%20Claim%20of%20Prosecutorial%20Abuse%20Refuted%20by%20New%20Audio%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“New York State Lawmakers Spend Millions in Campaign Funds on Legal
Fees” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74918>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 12:43 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74918>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT reports.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/nyregion/new-york-state-lawmakers-spend-millions-in-campaign-funds-on-legal-fees.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74918&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20York%20State%20Lawmakers%20Spend%20Millions%20in%20Campaign%20Funds%20on%20Legal%20Fees%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Ex-Illinois Gov. Blagojevich asks full court to hear appeal”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74916>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 12:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74916>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BLAGOJEVICH_ILOL-?SITE=ILBLO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-08-04-15-08-14>:
Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich asked a full federal appellate
court in Chicago to rehear his appeal after three judges recently
overturned five of his 18 corruption convictions.
The imprisoned Democrat’s lawyers filed the request Tuesday with the
7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Update: Here’s thepetition for rehearing en banc
<http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/Blagoyevich%20petition%20for%20en%20banc%20rehearing.pdf>(viaHow
Appealing <http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/080415.html#063135>)
Update 2:Full Blagojevich statement.
<https://twitter.com/mtarm/status/628676583574925312/photo/1>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74916&title=%E2%80%9CEx-Illinois%20Gov.%20Blagojevich%20asks%20full%20court%20to%20hear%20appeal%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inbribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
Sen. Bernie Sanders Give Campaign Finance Speech on Senate Floor
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74912>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 11:47 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74912>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Beginning at the 1:50 markover at CSPAN
<http://www.c-span.org/video/?327482-1/us-senate-debate-cybersecurity&live>.
He calls for a constitutional amendment to overturn both Citizens United
and Buckley v. Valeo.
He also endorses disclosure and public funding of elections.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74912&title=Sen.%20Bernie%20Sanders%20Give%20Campaign%20Finance%20Speech%20on%20Senate%20Floor&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Shadow Campaigns: The Shift in Presidential Campaign Funding to
Outside Groups” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74910>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 11:42 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74910>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brennan Center
<http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/shadow-campaigns-shift-presidential-campaign-funding-outside-groups>:
Outside groups set up to benefit specific candidates have raised
twice as much as the candidates themselves so far in the 2016
presidential race — and groups reported to have close ties to a
candidate account for 96 percent of total outside fundraising. This
connection to the candidates is crucial to the fundraising success
of the highest-performing outside groups. In the past, groups and
candidates were more reluctant to explicitly tie themselves
together. But this cycle, shadow campaigns seem more brazen than
ever about telegraphing their connections to candidates — and big
donors are rewarding those groups that have close ties.
Read the Introduction
<http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/shadow-campaigns-shift-presidential-campaign-funding-outside-groups#Introduction>
Download the Report
<http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Shadow_Campaigns.pdf>
View on Scribd
<https://www.scribd.com/doc/273512235/Shadow-Campaigns-The-Shift-in-Presidential-Campaign-Funding-to-Outside-Groups>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74910&title=%E2%80%9CShadow%20Campaigns%3A%20The%20Shift%20in%20Presidential%20Campaign%20Funding%20to%20Outside%20Groups%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Secretary Padilla Ends Appeal of Scott v. Bowen Case; Settlement
will Restore Voting Rights to Thousands of Californians “
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74908>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 11:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74908>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release
<http://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/news-releases-and-advisories/2015-news-releases-and-advisories/secretary-padilla-ends-appeal-scott-v-bowen-case/>:
In a ruling last year, the Alameda Superior Court concluded that
low-level offenders who are subject to mandatory supervision or
post-release community supervision under the Public Safety
Realignment Act are eligible to register to vote under Article II,
Section 4 of the California Constitution.
The ruling in that case, Scott v. Bowen, was subsequently appealed
by the previous Secretary of State administration.
Today, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is announcing both
an end to the appeal and a settlement that ends a policy that
disenfranchised thousands of Californians.
Californians subject to post-release community supervision or
mandatory supervision under Realignment will be eligible to register
to vote once the court has officially dismissed the appeal.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74908&title=%E2%80%9CSecretary%20Padilla%20Ends%20Appeal%20of%20Scott%20v.%20Bowen%20Case%3B%20Settlement%20will%20Restore%20Voting%20Rights%20to%20Thousands%20of%20Californians%20%E2%80%9C&description=>
Posted infelon voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=66>
“Obama to call for Voting Rights Act restoration on law’s
anniversary” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74906>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 11:01 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74906>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Hill reports.
<http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/250199-obama-to-call-for-voting-rights-act-restoration-on-laws-anniversary>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74906&title=%E2%80%9CObama%20to%20call%20for%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20restoration%20on%20law%E2%80%99s%20anniversary%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Koch Brothers Gather Conservative Donors To Hear GOP Candidates”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74904>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 11:00 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74904>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Peter Overby reports
<http://www.npr.org/2015/08/03/429065117/koch-brothers-gather-conservative-donors-to-hear-gop-candidates>for
NPR.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74904&title=%E2%80%9CKoch%20Brothers%20Gather%20Conservative%20Donors%20To%20Hear%20GOP%20Candidates%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Stephen Harper of Canada, Hoping to Extend Conservatives’ Hold,
Calls Elections” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74902>
Posted onAugust 4, 2015 10:57 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74902>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/03/world/americas/canadian-prime-minister-calls-federal-election.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0>:
Yasmin Dawood, a professor of law and political science at the
University of Toronto, said the timing of the elections appeared
intended to enable the Conservatives, who overwhelmingly lead in
fund-raising, to outspend opponents.
Election law changes
<http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/AnnualStatutes/2014_12/page-1.html>introduced
last year set a minimum of 37 days for campaigns but do not impose a
maximum. The law means that parties would in theory be able to spend
a maximum of about 25 million Canadian dollars, or $19.1 million,
for the first 37 days of the election plus an extra 685,185 Canadian
dollars for every day afterward. Fund-raising filings up until last
month show that, barring a flood of funds for opposition parties,
only the Conservatives would have the money to spend the maximum
allowed.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74902&title=%E2%80%9CStephen%20Harper%20of%20Canada%2C%20Hoping%20to%20Extend%20Conservatives%E2%80%99%20Hold%2C%20Calls%20Elections%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
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/20150805/2f7a3094/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/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: elect-litig-2103-14.png
Type: image/png
Size: 32263 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: guy_charles.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3117 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Luis-Fuentes-Rohwer-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6887 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: abigail-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2301 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Jamal_GreeneRFD-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8550 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0003.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 06hasenimg-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 9285 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0004.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: perales-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2702 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0005.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: jeffries-thumbStandard.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2087 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150805/2f7a3094/attachment-0006.jpg>
View list directory