[EL] ELB News and Commentary 12/22/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Dec 22 09:26:35 PST 2015
Blogging Break and Happy Holidays! <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78537>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 9:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78537>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Blogging will be light through New Year’s–-regular ELB News and
Commentary mailings for Election Law listserv members will resume on
January 4.
Once again it has been a busy year for the Election Law Blog and 2016
promises somebig news in the litigation world
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78554>as the campaign season heats up.
It will be particularly busy for me with the release of my new
book,Plutocrats 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>,
on January 12, anda book tour and talks
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77845>beginningJanuary 12 in Los Angeles
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/event/?postId=66754>with Zocalo
Public Square.
I was honored that this year the Election Law Blog was named to the /ABA
Journal/‘s “Blawg 100”Hall of Fame
<http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/2013_blawg_100_hall_of_fame>.
I wish all my readers a safe, healthy and happy 2016.
Below the fold you’ll find a list of books, articles and opeds that I’ve
published (or that were released in draft) in 2015. Thanks for reading!
Continue reading→ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78537#more-78537>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78537&title=Blogging%20Break%20and%20Happy%20Holidays%21&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Key Election Law/Voting Rights/Campaign Finance Litigation to Watch
in 2016 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78554>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 9:20 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78554>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I expect a lot of litigation over election issues in 2016, including
emergency last minute litigation making it to the Supreme Court as part
of whatWill Baude calls
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/03/opinion/the-supreme-courts-secret-decisions.html>the
Supreme Court’s “shadow docket.
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2545130>” When that
litigation makes it to the Supreme Court, perhaps as the date for
printing ballots approach or early voting begins, the Court may continue
to apply the “Purcell principle,” which has been to caution courts
against making last minute changes in voting rules. I’ve been pushing
back against aggressive use of this principle, arguing that the Court
needs to balance other factors too in handling emergency election
litigation. See/Reining in the Purcell Principle/,/Florida State
University Law Review/(forthcoming 2015) (draft available
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2545676>).
In terms of pending litigation, here are the highlights of the most
important cases:
1. */North Carolina/.*Last summer there was a trial overNorth
Carolina’s strict new voting rules
<http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/01/race-or-party-how-courts-should-think-about-republican-efforts-to-make-it-harder-to-vote-in-north-carolina-and-elsewhere/>,
all except the voter id portion of that case, which was put on hold
as North Carolina tweaked (and somewhat loosened its requirements).
The lawsuit claims that the tightening of voting and registration
rules violated both Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S.
Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection. From reports at the
trial, the trial judge seemed skeptical of the claims. But no
opinion has been forthcoming, even though many of us expected
something in September or October. Meanwhile, the voter id portion
of the case is set for trial, and there is a state case as well.
Perhaps the federal court is waiting to roll voter id into a single
opinion, but that might push things too far into election season.
There will be an inevitable appeal to the Fourth Circuit, and this
case could well end up at the Supreme Court too. (Moritz
page<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/LOWVv.Howard.php>for
federal case.)
2. /*Texas voter id.*/A trial court issued a massive opinion holding
that Texas’s strict voter identification law violated both the
Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution. A Fifth Circuit panel,
in a somewhat surprising decision, affirmed that Texas’s voter id
law violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, but ordered the
case remanded for a narrower remedy to deal with the problem (rather
than holding the law wholly unconstitutional). However, there has
been a pending request from Texas for the entire Fifth Circuit to
hear the case en banc. The en banc petition has been pending for
months. I think this means it is fairly likely that en banc will be
denied, and Texas will seek to take this case to the Supreme Court,
which could well take the case, setting up a major test of the
meaning of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in what Dan Tokaji has
called thenew vote denial cases
<http://harvardcrcl.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Applying-Section-2-to-the-New-Vote-Denial.pdf>.
(Moritz page.
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/VeaseyV.Perry.php>)
3. */Republican Party of Louisiana challenge to federal soft money
ban/.* In /Citizens United, /the Supreme Court struck one of the
McCain-Feingold law’s two pillars: the ban on corporate and labor
union general treasury funding of sham issue ads/electioneering
communications. Campaign finance opponent Jim Bopp has been angling
to challenge the other pillar, the ban of party soft money, before
the Supreme Court. After a few failed attempts, he now has
maneuvered the case before a three-judge court in Washington D.C.,
whichgreatly increases the odds
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77857>the Supreme Court will take the
case and kill party soft money. This is perhaps the most important
election case to come in 2016, but it likely won’t make it to the
Supreme Court before the 2016 elections. (FEC page
<http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/lagop.shtml>.)
4. */Evenwel One person, one vote case/. *This case was argued at the
Supreme Court earlier in December, and a decision is expected by
June. I amnot worried <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77988>that the
Supreme Court will side with the plaintiffs and require
jurisdictions to redistrict using total voters rather than total
population (a move which would shift lots of power to rural,
Republican areas). Noram I worried
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1210-hasen-evenwel-voting-district-20151208-story.html>that
the Court will require jurisdictions to draw districts which
equalize both total voters and total population. But I have heard
from a lot of Democrats who are worried that the Court will affirm
the right of jurisdictions to choose total voters or total
population (which is what I’ve always thought the law is now), and
that places like Texas will try to do this in their next round of
redistricting, to try to get rid of some more Democratic/Latino
districts. That would set up a new round of lawsuits, and a possible
clash between constitutional principles and the Voting Rights Act.
(SCOTUSBlog page
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/evenwel-v-abbott/?wpmp_switcher=desktop>.)
5. */Redistricting cases/*. As we enter the second half of the decade,
redistricting litigation is still going strong. The Supreme Court in
theHarris case
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harris-v-arizona-independent-redistricting-commission/?wpmp_switcher=desktop>is
considering when partisanship in redistricting can limit deviations
from perfect population equality in drawing districts. The Court is
also hearing aracial gerrymandering case
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/wittman-v-personhuballah/>out
of Virginia, a follow on to the Alabama redistricting case of last
year. (I discuss the Alabama case, and the follow on racial
gerrymandering cases in/Racial Gerrymandering’s Questionable
Revival,//Alabama Law Review/(forthcoming 2015) (draft available
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2601459>).)
Racial gerrymandering cases may also hit the Court from North
Carolina, another from Virginia, and the Alabama case on a return
trip. Meanwhile, the never-ending litigation over whether Texas’s
redistricting violates the Voting Rights Actawaits decision before a
three-judge court<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77373>in San
Antonio. (Moritz page
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/PerezVTexas.php>for
Texas case.) There is also new life breathed into partisan
gerrymandering claims, inWisconsin
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78439>andMaryland
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78127>.
6. */Voting Wars litigation/.*Marc Elias, who is Hillary Clinton’s
campaign lawyer, has brought a series of cases (not on behalf of
Clinton but supported by the Clinton campaign) challenging
restrictions in voting rules inWisconsin
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72945>,Ohio
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72382>, and elsewhere. The casesare
controversial <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73441>in the voting
rights community, who worry they could set some bad precedents. In
Ohio, for example, the ACLU settled a suit raising similar claims to
the one Elias brought a few months before Elias filed this suit.
These cases could heat up on an emergency basis as the 2016 election
approaches, and end up before the Supreme Court.
Lots to watch to 2016.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78554&title=Key%20Election%20Law%2FVoting%20Rights%2FCampaign%20Finance%20Litigation%20to%20Watch%20in%202016&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,redistricting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
My Most Important Oped/Commentary of 2015
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78541>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 8:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78541>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This piece at @TPM on the Supreme Court is the most important commentary
I’ve written in 2015: Why The Most Urgent Civil Rights Cause Of Our Time
Is The Supreme Court Itself
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/supreme-court-greatest-civil-rights-cause>,
Talking Points Memo, Sept. 28, 2015. It begins:
The future composition of the Supreme Court is the most important
civil rights cause of our time. It is more important than racial
justice, marriage equality, voting rights, money in politics,
abortion rights, gun rights, or managing climate change. It matters
more because the ability to move forward in these other civil rights
struggles depends first and foremost upon control of the Court. And
control for the next generation is about to be up for grabs, likely
in the next presidential election, a point many on the right but few
on the left seem to have recognized.
When the next President of the United States assumes office on
January 20, 2017, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be nearly 84,
Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy will be over 80, and
Justice Stephen Breyer will be 78. Although many Justices have
served on the Court into their 80s and beyond, the chances for all
of these Justices remaining through the next 4 or 8 years of the
45th President are slim. Indeed, the next president will likely make
multiple appointments to the Court.
The stakes are high. On non-controversial cases, or cases where the
ideological stakes are low, the Justices often agree and are
sometimes unanimous. In such cases, the Justices act much like lower
court judges do, applying precedents, text, history, and a range of
interpretative tools to decide cases. In the most controversial
cases, however—those involving issues such as gun rights,
affirmative action, abortion, money in politics, privacy, and
federal power—the value judgments and ideology of the Supreme Court
Justices, and increasingly the party affiliation of the president
appointing them, are good predictors of each Justice’s vote.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78541&title=My%20Most%20Important%20Oped%2FCommentary%20of%202015&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Scott Walker Corruption Case Threatens to Implicate Wisconsin
Supreme Court Justices” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78552>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 8:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78552>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Pema Levy for Mother Jones:
<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/12/will-scott-walker-corruption-case-go-all-way-supreme-court>
It’s the campaign scandal that just won’t die. For three years,
prosecutors in Wisconsin tried toinvestigate
<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/scott-walker-john-doe-investigation>what
they believed was illegal campaign coordination between Wisconsin
Gov. Scott Walker and conservative outside groups. The investigation
has become a political flash point in the state: Walker and
conservatives claim it is a witch hunt led by liberal prosecutors,
while liberals believe it is about the power of dark money in
Wisconsin politics.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed the case, but on Friday, the
case moved to the national stage when prosecutorssignaled
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/chisholm-two-other-das-seek-to-move-john-doe-to-us-supreme-court-b99636792z1-362956011.html>their
intention to take it to the US Supreme Court. And the focus is now
set to shift from the actions of Walker and his allies to potential
ethical violations by the Wisconsin Supreme Court justices themselves….
There are two potential issues that the district attorneys could
appeal to the Supreme Court: a challenge on the merits of the state
court’s campaign finance ruling, and an ethical challenge to the
failure of the justices to recuse themselves. It’s the second
question that experts believe makes for the stronger case.
“I would not want to bring any campaign finance case to this Supreme
Court,” says Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of
California-Irvine School of Law, nodding to the conservative bent of
the court on this issue. But the recusal question, he says, “has a
decent chance.” And that’s where court watchers believe the case
will indeed focus.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78552&title=%26%238220%3BScott%20Walker%20Corruption%20Case%20Threatens%20to%20Implicate%20Wisconsin%20Supreme%20Court%20Justices%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“New Mexico Struggles With Campaign Finance Enforcement”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78550>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 8:10 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78550>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP:
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/mexico-struggles-campaign-finance-enforcement-35889228>
FormerNew Mexico
<http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/new-mexico.htm>Secretary of State
Dianna Duran was able to funnel thousands of dollars in campaign
donations to her private bank accounts during a gambling binge
without any regulatory agency noticing that she was breaking the law.
Duran’s own agency was in charge of regulating campaign finance, but
it was a confidential tip about numerous cash deposits that led to
her getting caught.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78550&title=%26%238220%3BNew%20Mexico%20Struggles%20With%20Campaign%20Finance%20Enforcement%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Oregon Prepares To Rollout ‘New Motor Voter’ On January 4”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78548>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 7:55 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78548>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
A ChapinBlog.
<http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2015/12/22/oregon-prepares-to-rollout-new-motor-voter-on-january-4/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78548&title=%26%238220%3BOregon%20Prepares%20To%20Rollout%20%26%238216%3BNew%20Motor%20Voter%26%238217%3B%20On%20January%204%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inabsentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Hindering the S.E.C. From Shining a Light on Political Spending”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78546>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 7:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78546>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lucian Bebchuk and Robert Jackson write
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/22/business/dealbook/hindering-the-sec-from-shining-a-light-on-political-spending.html?_r=2>for
NYT Dealbook.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78546&title=%26%238220%3BHindering%20the%20S.E.C.%20From%20Shining%20a%20Light%20on%20Political%20Spending%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
EAC, FVAP Send Letter to USPS About Problems with Mail Ballots
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78544>
Posted onDecember 22, 2015 7:53 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78544>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read it here
<http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Documents/USPS%20Letter-OCR-A&E.pdf>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78544&title=EAC%2C%20FVAP%20Send%20Letter%20to%20USPS%20About%20Problems%20with%20Mail%20Ballots&description=>
Posted inabsentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Election Assistance
Commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34>
My Academic Articles 2013-2014 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78535>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 4:11 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78535>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Moving these off the Sidebar as well.
Response: “Electoral Integrity,” “Dependence Corruption,” and What’s New
Under the Sun
<http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-89-online-symposium/response-electoral-integrity-dependence-corruption-and-whats-new>,
89/New York University Law Review Online/87 (2014)
Super PAC Contributions, Corruption, and the Proxy War over Coordination
<http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1085&context=djclpp>,/Duke
Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy/, (2014)
Race or Party? How Courts Should Think About Republican Efforts to Make
it Harder to Vote in North Carolina and Elsewhere
<http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/01/race-or-party-how-courts-should-think-about-republican-efforts-to-make-it-harder-to-vote-in-north-carolina-and-elsewhere/>,
127/Harvard Law Review Forum/58 (2014)
Shelby County and the Illusion of Minimalism
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2291612>, 22/William
and Mary Bill of Rights J./713 (2014)
Three Wrong Progressive Approaches (and One Right One) to Campaign
Finance Reform
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293979>, 8/Harvard
Law & Policy Review/21 (2014)
Keynote Address of Prof. Richard L. Hasen Given to the Voting Wars
Symposium, March 23, 2013
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2339193>, 28/Journal
of Law and Politics/417 (2013)
Political Dysfunction and Constitutional Change
<http://ssrn.com/abstract=2243798>, 61/Drake Law Review/989 (2013)
(symposium)
Is “Dependence Corruption” Distinct from a Political Equality Argument
for Campaign Finance Reform? A Reply to Professor Lessig
<http://ssrn.com/abstract=2220851>, 12/Election Law Journal/315 (2013)
The 2012 Voting Wars, Judicial Backstops, and the Resurrection of Bush
v. Gore <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2182857>,
81/George Washington Law Review/1865 (2013)
A Constitutional Right to Lie in Campaigns and Elections?
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151618>, 74/Montana
Law Review/53 (2013)
End of the Dialogue? Political Polarization, the Supreme Court, and
Congress <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2130190>,
86/Southern California Law Review/205 (2013)
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78535&title=My%20Academic%20Articles%202013-2014&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
My Opeds and Commentaries 2014 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78532>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 4:07 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78532>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I am moving them off the Sidebar as I spruce things up around here.
History Gives Clue as to Chief Justice Roberts’ Thinking on New
Obamacare Case
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-roberts-supreme-court-obamacare-20141113-story.html>,/L.A.
Times/, Nov. 12, 2014
The Supreme Court’s Gerrymandering Conundrum
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_redistricting_supreme_court_did_legislators_redraw_district_lines.html>,/Slate/,
Nov. 11, 2014
Lousy Judgment: This Year’s Scary Election Ads Will Destroy Any
Lingering Confidence in the Judicial Branch
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/judicial_election_outrageous_ads_campaign_contributions_break_records.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top>,/Slate/,
Oct. 31, 2014 (with Dahlia Lithwick)
Messing with Texas Again: Putting It Back Under Federal Supervision
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/messing-with-texas-voter-id>,/Talking
Points Memo/, Oct. 30, 2014
A Call to Expose the Unnecessary Secrets of the Supreme Court
<http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202674529554/OpEd-A-Call-to-Expose-the-Unnecessary-Secrets-of-the-Supreme-Court?cmp=share_twitter&slreturn=20141116102422>,/National
Law Journal/, Oct. 27, 2014
Dawn Patrol: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s critically important 5 a.m.
wake-up call on voting rights
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/ginsburg_s_dissent_in_texas_voter_id_law_supreme_court_order.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top>,/Slate/,
Oct. 19, 2014
How to Predict a Voting Rights Decision; The Supreme Court just made it
harder to vote in some states and easier in others
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/supreme_court_voting_rights_decisions_contradictions_in_wisconsin_ohio_north.html>,/Slate/,
Oct. 10, 2014
The Voting Wars Heat Up: Will the Supreme Court allow states to restrict
voting for partisan advantage?
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/09/voting_restrictions_may_reach_the_supreme_court_from_ohio_wisconsin_north.html>,/Slate/,
Sept. 29, 2014
Just Politics: Just because politics can be ugly doesn’t make it a crime
<http://slate.me/1ySjjdl>,/Slate/, Aug. 18, 2014
Bad Readers: The judges who ruled against Obamacare are following Scalia
down a terrible path of interpretation
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/d_c_circuit_and_4th_circuit_obamacare_rulings_the_perils_of_following_scalia.html>,/Slate/,
July 23, 2014
Here’s $20 Million for Your Candidate: The Scott Walker case could shred
the remaining limits on influencing elections
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/06/the_scott_walker_case_in_wisconsin_could_shred_the_remaining_limits_on_influencing.html>,/Slate/,
June 20, 2014
Exorcising the Voter Fraud Ghost
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/30/exorcising-the-voter-fraud-ghost/>,/Reuters
Opinion/, April 30, 2014
Change the Constitution in Six Easy Steps?
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/20/change-the-constitution-in-six-easy-steps-it-won-t-be-that-simple-justice-stevens.html>,/Daily
Beast/, April 20, 2014
Thomas Alone on Campaign Finance?
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/hasen-thomas-daily-journal.pdf>,/Los
Angeles Daily Journal/, April 8, 2014
How to Reverse a Supreme Court Attack on Democracy: Fight for Voting
Rights
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/08/supreme-court-fight-for-voting-rights>,/The
Guardian/, April 8, 2014
Opening the Political Money Chutes
<http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/07/opening-the-political-money-chutes/>,/Reuters
Opinion/, April 7, 2014
Die Another Day: The Supreme Court takes a big step closer to gutting
the last bits of campaign finance reform
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/04/the_subtle_awfulness_of_the_mccutcheon_v_fec_campaign_finance_decision_the.html>,/Slate/,
April 2, 2014
How ‘the next Citizens United’ could bring more corruption — but less
gridlock
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-next-citizens-united-could-bring-more-corruption--but-less-gridlock/2014/02/21/a190d1c6-95ab-11e3-afce-3e7c922ef31e_story.html>,/Washington
Post/, February 21, 2014
The New Conservative Assault on Early Voting
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/02/the_new_conservative_assault_on_early_voting_more_republicans_fewer_voters.html>,/Slate/,
February 10, 2014
Eye on the Courts: 2014 Will Be a Pivotal Year for Voting Rights
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/eyes-on-the-courts-2014-will-be-pivotal-for-voting-rights>,/TPM/,
January 9, 2014
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78532&title=My%20Opeds%20and%20Commentaries%202014&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Chair Ann Ravel Explains Why the FEC is Broken”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78530>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 3:42 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78530>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
FEC Commissioner Ann Ravel writes.
<http://www.calbuzz.com/2015/12/chair-ann-ravel-explains-why-the-fec-is-broken/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78530&title=%26%238220%3BChair%20Ann%20Ravel%20Explains%20Why%20the%20FEC%20is%20Broken%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“Common Cause: Citizens United Isn’t Blocking Reforms”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78528>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 12:09 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78528>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
TWC News
<http://www.nystateofpolitics.com/2015/12/common-cause-citizens-united-isnt-blocking-reforms/>:
The good-government group Common Cause vehemently disagreed with
Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s assertion on Monday in a radio interview that
the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case made it
impossible for major campaign-finance law changes.
“You need people in office who are going to use their best judgment
in office,” Cuomo said on WNYC this morning, “because you’re not
going to change the campaign finance system because of Citizens United.”
It’s argument Cuomo has made before, often in the context of
creating a statewide public financing system for elections.
Common Cause Executive Director Susan Lerner, however, said the
decision in the case shouldn’t hinder campaign-law changes.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78528&title=%26%238220%3BCommon%20Cause%3A%20Citizens%20United%20Isn%E2%80%99t%20Blocking%20Reforms%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Tea party groups see win in end-of-year omnibus bill”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78526>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 10:48 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78526>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CPI
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/12/21/19091/tea-party-groups-see-win-end-year-omnibus-bill>:
Two-and-a-half years after the Internal Revenue Serviceapologized
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/irs-admits-targeting-conservatives-for-tax-scrutiny-in-2012-election/2013/05/10/3b6a0ada-b987-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html>for
using “inappropriate criteria” to scrutinize tea party-aligned
nonprofits applying for tax-exempt status, President Barack Obama
has signed into law a new measure that makes it easier for nonprofit
groups to receive a tax break — or sue the agency to avoid legal limbo.
Such groups have proliferated in recent years and become
increasingly active in elections in the wake of the U.S. Supreme
Court’s 2010 decision in/Citizens United v. Federal Election
Commission
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/10/18/11527/citizens-united-decision-and-why-it-matters>/.
These nonprofits, many of which are organized under section
501(c)(4) of the tax code, need not publicly disclose their donors.
And their primary purpose must be the “promotion of social welfare,”
not electoral politics.
More than 100 groups seeking tax-exempt recognition that were deemed
to be potentially political by the IRS waited more than a year for
answers from the agency, according to a May 2013report
<https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/201310053fr.pdf>by
the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78526&title=%26%238220%3BTea%20party%20groups%20see%20win%20in%20end-of-year%20omnibus%20bill%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
Litigant in “Most Significant Application” of Bush v. Gore Precedent
Cannot Run Again for Judge Because of Felony Conviction
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78524>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 10:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78524>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Election law nerds spent a lot of time on /Hunter v. Hamilton County
Board of Elections/ <https://electionlawblog.org/?p=29505>, a case in
which the Sixth Circuit revived a strong reading of the Supreme Court’s
/Bush v. Gore /decision as an equal protection case./Hunter /is the case
that Ned Foley called <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=17829>“the most
significant application” by a court of Bush v. Gore. It involved the
inconsistent handling of provisional ballots in a race for juvenile
court judge.
Now one of those judicial candidates, Tracie Hunter, has been denied the
chance to run for judge again because of a felony conviction. Here, the
vote on the bipartisan boardwas unanimous
<http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/12/21/board-denies-tracie-hunters-request-run-judge/77691188/>:
Board members, however, voted 4-0 to deny her petition. They said
they had no choice because Hunter has been convicted of one of the
charges against her – mishandling documents – and cannot run for
judge as a felon. They said she also is ineligible because her law
license has been suspended by the Ohio Supreme Court.
Because of Hunter’s legal troubles in Hamilton County, board members
sought the advice of an outside lawyer before making their decision.
That lawyer, Michael Mentel, a Democrat and former City Council
president in Columbus, recommended the board reject Hunter’s petition.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78524&title=Litigant%20in%20%26%238220%3BMost%20Significant%20Application%26%238221%3B%20of%20Bush%20v.%20Gore%20Precedent%20Cannot%20Run%20Again%20for%20Judge%20Because%20of%20Felony%20Conviction&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Return of the States” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78522>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 9:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78522>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ruth Greenwood<http://socialchangenyu.com/return-of-the-states/>with a
Star Wars-themed election law piece:
In the wake of/Shelby County v Holder/[1]
<http://socialchangenyu.com/return-of-the-states/#_ftn2>and the
hundreds of restrictions on voting rights passed by state
legislatures in the last five years,[2]
<http://socialchangenyu.com/return-of-the-states/#_ftn3>Ben Cady and
Tom Glazer’s article,/Voters Strike Back/,[3]
<http://socialchangenyu.com/return-of-the-states/#_ftn4>provides a
timely and comprehensive review of the causes of action available
for voter intimidation. It provides guidance to litigators on how to
use these currently underutilized provisions to protect voters, at a
time when their rights are under renewed attack. Cady and Glazer’s
article provokes two questions—one normative and one practical.
First, should the courts treat voter intimidation committed under
color of state law in the same way as that committed by private
actors? I posit the answer should be yes. And second, how can
litigators encourage the courts to stop ignoring the clear language
and legislative history of section 11(b) of the Voting Rights
Act?[4] <http://socialchangenyu.com/return-of-the-states/#_ftn5>The
first step is to follow Cady and Glazer’s suggestion to only plead a
section 11(b) violation, but litigators should also more clearly
articulate the relevant language and history of that provision.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78522&title=%26%238220%3BReturn%20of%20the%20States%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Clinton campaign sweats out data breach damage”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78520>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 8:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78520>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico:
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-data-breach-217019>
Accusing your opponent of committing evil and unpardonable crimes is
basic presidential campaign jujitsu. But Hillary’s Clinton’s team is
genuinely jittery about the sneak peek taken by Bernie Sanders
staffers into their secret voter file.
The unauthorized fishing expedition into the database housing the
names and demographic information of voters Clinton plans to target
– which led to the sacking of a top Sanders staffer and the
suspension of two more — has embittered the campaigns against one
another, even if the two principals made nice on the debate stage
Saturday night.
And it’s a source of real and deepening concern for Clinton’s data
and voter targeting teams in Iowa – where Clinton leads by single
digits — and New Hampshire, where she trails neighboring-state Sen.
Sanders by a similar spread.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78520&title=%26%238220%3BClinton%20campaign%20sweats%20out%20data%20breach%20damage%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“How to Block Minority Representation, Yesterday and Today”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78518>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 8:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78518>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Graham
<http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/12/blocking-minority-representation-yesterday-and-today/421407/>at
The Atlantic.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78518&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20to%20Block%20Minority%20Representation%2C%20Yesterday%20and%20Today%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Voting only by mail can decrease turnout. Or increase it. Wait,
what?” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78516>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 8:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78516>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Elizabeth Bergman
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/12/21/voting-only-by-mail-can-decrease-or-increase-turnout-wait-what/>at
The Monkey Cage.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78516&title=%26%238220%3BVoting%20only%20by%20mail%20can%20decrease%20turnout.%20Or%20increase%20it.%20Wait%2C%20what%3F%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inabsentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
“White House surrenders on ‘dark money’ regulation”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78514>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 8:08 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78514>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico reports.
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/white-house-dark-money-216956>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78514&title=%26%238220%3BWhite%20House%20surrenders%20on%20%26%238216%3Bdark%20money%26%238217%3B%20regulation%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
Q & A with Anthony Johnstone on Litigating Campaign Finance Cases in
Montana <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78512>
Posted onDecember 21, 2015 8:03 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78512>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read.
<https://view.publitas.com/umontanalaw/montana-barrister-magazine-fall-2015/page/24-25>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78512&title=Q%20%26%23038%3B%20A%20with%20Anthony%20Johnstone%20on%20Litigating%20Campaign%20Finance%20Cases%20in%20Montana&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,election
law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>
--
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/20151222/5860b550/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/20151222/5860b550/attachment.png>
View list directory