[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/19/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Aug 19 08:09:37 PDT 2015
“Why Campaigns Have the Edge Over Super PACs on TV”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75442>
Posted onAugust 19, 2015 8:07 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75442>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
National Journal reports.
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/why-campaigns-have-the-edge-over-super-pacs-on-tv-20150819>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75442&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20Campaigns%20Have%20the%20Edge%20Over%20Super%20PACs%20on%20TV%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Rand Paul Purchases a Path Around an Inconvenient Kentucky Law”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75440>
Posted onAugust 19, 2015 8:04 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75440>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Atlantic
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/rand-paul-will-pay-for-kentuckys-gop-election-by-himself/401711/>:
Over the weekend, the Kentucky senator said hegave $250,000 to his
state’s Republican Party
<http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/17/3992690_rand-paul-makes-250000-down-payment.html?rh=1>for
the explicit purpose of funding its presidential caucus in March. He
promised to pony up another $200,000 in the fall, enough to cover
the entire cost of the nominating event. Put another way: Paul is
paying the party to hold an election in which he is running.
He’s doing it neither to ensure a victory nor out of the simple
goodness of his heart. No, Paul is making a rather blatant end-run
around state law, and he’s compensating the Kentucky GOP for going
along with him. The law forbids someone from appearing on the same
ballot as a candidate for two different offices, and Paul, who is up
for reelection next year, doesn’t want to give up his Senate seat to
make his rather long-shot bid for the presidency.
Democrats in the Bluegrass Grass state blocked his allies’ attempt
to repeal the law, so Paul has been trying to persuade the
Republican Party to ditch its presidential primary in May in favor
of a caucus in March. That way, the primaries for president and
Senate won’t be on the same day, and Paul won’t have to appear twice
on the same ballot.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75440&title=%E2%80%9CRand%20Paul%20Purchases%20a%20Path%20Around%20an%20Inconvenient%20Kentucky%20Law%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,political
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
“How Ballot Selfies Can Threaten Democracy”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75438>
Posted onAugust 19, 2015 7:58 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75438>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here’s an interview
<http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/selfies-danger-below/>with me on The
Takeaway, aboutmy recent Reuters piece
<http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/selfies-danger-below/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75438&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Ballot%20Selfies%20Can%20Threaten%20Democracy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted invote buying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=43>
The Originalism Blog on the DC Circuit Origination Clause Case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75436>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 6:59 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75436>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<http://originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalism-blog/2015/08/the-senate-may-propose-or-concur-with-amendments-as-it-pleasesandrew-hyman.html>
(My earlier analysis. <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75125>)
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75436&title=The%20Originalism%20Blog%20on%20the%20DC%20Circuit%20Origination%20Clause%20Case&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
“Proposed electioneering rule addresses political attack ads”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75434>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 6:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75434>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bozeman Daily Chronicle
<http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/politics/proposed-electioneering-rule-addresses-political-attack-ads/article_b1990276-1a3e-5184-a9af-600f1bfbe927.html>:
As part of the state’s new election disclosure law, Montana’s
commissioner of political practices has proposed a rule aimed at
attack ads masquerading as educational.
It has become common for “social welfare” organizations to send
postcards to voters or broadcast TV ads in the days before an election.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75434&title=%E2%80%9CProposed%20electioneering%20rule%20addresses%20political%20attack%20ads%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Texas lost when it thought it had won. The cost: $1 million”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75432>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 6:13 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75432>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lyle Denniston
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/08/texas-lost-when-it-thought-it-had-won-the-cost-1-million/>:
The state of Texas, one of the most energetic opponents of a key
part of the federal Voting Rights Act, has turned what it was sure
was a Supreme Court victory against that law into a legal defeat
that will cost it more than $1 million. That was theresult of a
ruling
<http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/CADC-ruling-8-18-15-on-Texas-and-VRA-atty-fees.pdf>by
a federal appeals court on Tuesday, interpreting what it means when
the Justices send a case back to a lower court for a new look.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will translate into a
sizable legal bill for Texas to cover what opponents in a major
election law case spent for their attorneys’ work.
The panel sharply accused the state’s lawyers of failing to obey
court rules, echoing an earlier comment by a federal trial court
judge that “this matter presents a case study in how not to respond
to a motion for attorney fees and costs.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75432&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20lost%20when%20it%20thought%20it%20had%20won.%20The%20cost%3A%20%241%20million%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Polifact Rates “True” Cory Booker’s Statement that Lightning Strike
More Prevalent than Vote Fraud in TX
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75430>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 6:05 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75430>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read.
<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/18/cory-booker/lightning-strikes-more-common-person-voter-fraud-s/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75430&title=Polifact%20Rates%20%E2%80%9CTrue%E2%80%9D%20Cory%20Booker%E2%80%99s%20Statement%20that%20Lightning%20Strike%20More%20Prevalent%20than%20Vote%20Fraud%20in%20TX&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
You Can Now Subscribe to the ELB Podcast on iTunes!
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75426>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 5:42 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75426>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
ELB Podcast – Rick Hasen
<https://geo.itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/elb-podcast/id1029317166?mt=2>
The first episode is with Ari Berman. Listen and let me know what you think!
Or listen onSoundCloud <http://soundcloud.com/rick-hasen>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75426&title=You%20Can%20Now%20Subscribe%20to%20the%20ELB%20Podcast%20on%20iTunes%21&description=>
Posted inELB Podcast <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=116>
“Could Donald Trump really run as an independent?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75423>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 10:02 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75423>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Guardian:
<http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/18/donald-trump-third-party-run-obstacles>
Running as an independent, however, would require more than a change
of heart by Trump – it would require a national campaign to document
the support of hundreds of thousands of voters across the country,
in the form of signed petitions and new voter registrations.
Even then, quirks in local election laws, and the judgment of local
officials, could conceivably keep Trump off the ballot in multiple
states, said Richard Winger, editor of Ballot Access News, a monthly
newsletter devoted to voting laws.
“It is hard. Definitely it’s hard,” Winger said of registering as a
national third-party candidate, in an interview with the Guardian.
“But people are capable of using their brains.”
Winger advised that in most states, so-called sore-loser laws, which
ban a candidate who loses a primary from switching parties for a
general election, have been shown not to apply to presidential
elections, because presidential party nominations are not won or
lost in any one state.
Some states make it more difficult than others, however, for
candidates to switch horses midstream, Winger said. A spokesman for
Ohio’s secretary of state, John Husted, has been quoted as
suggesting that Trump had disqualified himself for an independent
run in the state because he had chosen to participate in the
Republican primary debate in Cleveland earlier this month.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75423&title=%E2%80%9CCould%20Donald%20Trump%20really%20run%20as%20an%20independent%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,third parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47>
“Legal challenge to N.C. voter ID law could be settled, documents
say” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75420>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 9:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75420>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Woah
<http://www.journalnow.com/news/elections/local/legal-challenge-to-n-c-voter-id-law-could-be/article_ff4da1a0-6c39-5ad9-a068-9645c320159b.html#.VdNbixFAekU.twitter>:
But there may be room for compromise, according to a joint status
report that plaintiffs filed Monday. In the report, they said
“Plaintiffs’ pending photo ID claims may be able to be resolved
through discussion and negotiations with Defendants.”
“To that end, Plaintiffs are finalizing a proposed consent decree to
address certain of Plaintiffs’ continuing concerns,” according to
the plaintiffs’ status report.
Defendants still contend, however, that Schroeder should dismiss the
legal challenge on the photo ID requirement in light of the changes.
They argue that the decision by the 5th Circuit for the U.S. Court
of Appeals on Texas’ Voter ID law indicated the same kind of remedy
that state Republicans made in North Carolina’s photo ID
requirement. Plaintiffs contend that the 5th Circuit did not decide
what the proper remedy would be and left that for a lower federal
court to determine.
This would affect only the voter id aspect of only the federal case.
That still leaves the VRA challenges to other North Carolina voting
changes (currently in the hands of the federal district judge) and a
separate state trial on voter id.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75420&title=%E2%80%9CLegal%20challenge%20to%20N.C.%20voter%20ID%20law%20could%20be%20settled%2C%20documents%20say%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Texas Ordered to Pay $1M in Legal Fees in Voting Rights Case”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75418>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 9:00 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75418>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NLJ:
<http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202735015302/Texas-Ordered-to-Pay-1M-in-Legal-Fees-in-Voting-Rights-Case?cmp=share_twitter&slreturn=20150718115946>
Texas must pay more than $1 million in legal fees to groups that
challenged the state’s redistricting plans, a federal appeals court
in Washington_ruled on Tuesday
<http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/DC%20Circuit%20Texas%20fees.pdf>_.
Texas forfeited any opposition to fees when it failed to make
substantive arguments in the lower court, a three-judge panel of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said. A three-page
advisory filed by the state—contending that Texas became the winner
in the redistricting case after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a
provision of the Voting Rights Act in/Shelby County v.
Holder/—didn’t cut it, Judge Patricia Millett wrote.
“Texas gets no second bite at the apple now,” Millett wrote. “What
little argument Texas did advance in its ‘Advisory’ provides an
insufficient basis for overturning the district court’s award of
attorneys’ fees.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75418&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Ordered%20to%20Pay%20%241M%20in%20Legal%20Fees%20in%20Voting%20Rights%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Florida House, Senate divided in redistricting fight”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75416>
Posted onAugust 18, 2015 8:12 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75416>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The latest from FL.
<http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article31350566.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75416&title=%E2%80%9CFlorida%20House%2C%20Senate%20divided%20in%20redistricting%20fight%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
--
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/20150819/b1cd9d2a/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/20150819/b1cd9d2a/attachment.png>
View list directory