[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/715

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Jul 7 09:36:48 PDT 2015


    “Republicans have won the battle over money in politics. Should
    anyone celebrate?” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74107>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:32 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74107>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Paul 
Waldman<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/07/07/republicans-have-won-the-battle-over-money-in-politics-should-anyone-celebrate/>at 
The Plum Line.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74107&title=%E2%80%9CRepublicans%20have%20won%20the%20battle%20over%20money%20in%20politics.%20Should%20anyone%20celebrate%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Trump’s Super-PAC in a (Post Office) Box”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74105>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:29 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74105>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg reports. 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-07-06/trump-s-super-pac-in-a-post-office-box?cmpid=yhoo>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74105&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%E2%80%99s%20Super-PAC%20in%20a%20%28Post%20Office%29%20Box%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    “In Rio Grande Valley, Some Campaign Workers Are Paid To Harvest
    Votes” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74103>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74103>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NPR 
<http://www.npr.org/2015/07/07/413463879/in-rio-grande-valley-some-campaign-workers-are-paid-to-harvest-votes>:

    /This week, NPR examines public corruption in South Texas. The FBI
    has launched a task force to clean up entrenched wrongdoing by
    public servants in the Rio Grande Valley. In the final part of
    this//series, we examine vote-stealing and election fraud./

    A new FBI anti-corruption task force is trying to clean up the Rio
    Grande Valley of Texas. According to the Justice Department, in
    2013,more public officials were convicted for corruption
    <http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal/legacy/2014/09/09/2013-Annual-Report.pdf>in
    South Texas than in any other region of the country. One of the
    practices the task force is looking at is vote-stealing.

    They’re called/politiqueras —/a word unique to the border that means
    campaign worker. It’s a time-honored tradition down in the land of
    grapefruit orchards and Border Patrol checkpoints. If a local
    candidate needs dependable votes, he or she goes to a/politiquera./

    In recent years, losing candidates in local elections began to
    challenge vote harvesting by/politiqueras/in the Rio Grande Valley,
    and they shared their investigations with authorities. After the
    2012 election cycle, the Justice Department and the Texas attorney
    general’s office filed charges.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74103&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Rio%20Grande%20Valley%2C%20Some%20Campaign%20Workers%20Are%20Paid%20To%20Harvest%20Votes%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


    Bauer Critical of SCOTUS AZ Redistricting Decision and Renzi Cert.
    Denial <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74101>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:17 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74101>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Interesting read: 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/07/political-self-dealing-constitutional-innovation/>

    The doctrinal fine points are open to be debate, but it is hard to
    escape the impression that Court believes readily in the failures of
    the democratic process and the part played in this breakdown by
    self-interested legislators.   And it won’t overlook wrongdoing or
    allow the legislator’s constitutional defenses–perhaps also judged
    to be tainted by self-interest?–to get in the way.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74101&title=Bauer%20Critical%20of%20SCOTUS%20AZ%20Redistricting%20Decision%20and%20Renzi%20Cert.%20Denial&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Speech or 
Debate Clause <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=36>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Why Nonprofits Get Away With Campaigning”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74099>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74099>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Noah Feldman column. 
<http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-07-06/why-nonprofits-get-away-with-campaigning>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74099&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20Nonprofits%20Get%20Away%20With%20Campaigning%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Who Owns Your Politics?” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74097>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 9:12 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74097>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New America Foundation 
<http://www.newamerica.org/political-reform/who-owns-your-politics/>:

    A common piece of advice for new hires is to avoid talking about
    politics, sex, and religion in the workplace. But it may be
    increasingly difficult for workers to keep their politics to
    themselves. Thanks to the Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court
    decision from 2010, as well as new organizational infrastructure
    developed over the past decade, employers now have broad legal
    rights and the technical means to campaign for political candidates
    in the workplace. Managers and supervisors can even require that
    their workers participate in politics as a condition of employment.

    Employer mobilization is important to understand because it offers
    companies an opportunity to shape public policy using a resource
    already at their disposal: their workforce. Debates over corporate
    lobbying and the power of business in politics thus ought to
    consider employer mobilization just as much as they focus on
    campaign contributions and lobbyists.

    This policy brief provides an important contribution to our
    understanding of the prevalence of employer mobilization and how
    firms think about mobilization as a political strategy. Subsequent
    sections document the history of employer mobilization, tracing the
    social, economic, and political shifts that have made mobilization
    more appealing to firms in recent decades. The final portion of this
    brief describes why and how political reformers should take action
    to end the most coercive forms of employer mobilization, suggesting
    a range of possible legislative and voluntary actions that would
    shield workers from political intimidation in the workplace.

    /Alexander Hertel-Fernandez is a doctoral candidate in government
    and social policy at Harvard University. He studies the political
    economy of the United States, with an emphasis on the politics of
    organized interests, especially business, and public policy./

    To read the whole paper, clickhere
    <https://static.newamerica.org/attachments/3614--131/2015-07-06_Who%20Owns%20Your%20Politics_Policy%20Paper-AHF_FINAL.9f6a32d7f17c4c6a90ad85bfeaf90d85.pdf>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74097&title=%E2%80%9CWho%20Owns%20Your%20Politics%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    Breaking: DC Circuit En Banc Unanimously Upholds Ban on Federal
    Contractor Contributions to Candidates
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74090>

Posted onJuly 7, 2015 8:39 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74090>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

You can read the 62-page opinionat this link 
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/wagner.dca_.pdf>. This is 
quite a big deal, especially in its unanimity. The en banc DC Circuit in 
/Wagner v. FEC /holds that the ban on contractor contributions to 
federal candidates is supported by two interests: (1) preventing 
corruption and (2) promoting sound merit-based administration of federal 
contracts.  On the first point, the court discussed the special dangers 
of corruption which occur in the contracting process. The court surveys 
various state and federal corruption scandals, many of which involve the 
procurement of government contracts. On the second interest, the court 
relies in large part on the Hatch Act cases, in particular on the 
government’s interest in somewhat curtailing the First Amendment 
activities of government employees in order to assure a merit-based 
governmental process.

Perhaps what is most important doctrinally about this ruling is the 
court’s rejection of the argument that a higher level of scrutiny should 
apply because the law imposes a /ban/, rather than merely a /limit/, on 
contractor contributions.  Relying upon the Supreme Court’s decision in 
/FEC v. Beaumont/(which upheld the ban on corporate contributions to 
candidates), the Court held the ban was still subject to the lesser 
“exacting scrutiny” which applies to contribution limits. Opponents of 
the ban have argued that /Beaumont/‘s reasoning has been undermined by 
more recent Supreme Court cases, such as /Citizens United/. But the DC 
Circuit did not accept that argument.

This question (the vitality of /Beaumont/and the constitutionality of a 
ban, rather than limit on contributions) remains the most interesting 
issue which could provide a basis for the Supreme Court to grant cert. 
in the case. It is not clear whether the Court will bite on this one, 
for reasons I will be writing about in coming days.

Also interesting is that the DC Circuit did not address whether federal 
contractors may make contributions to Super PACs. (“Nor do they 
challenge the law as the Commission might seek to apply it to donations 
to PACs that themselves make only independent expenditures, commonly 
known as “Super PACs.” Oral Arg. Recording 5:59-26:33 (“Super PACs . . . 
. are not at issue here; none of my clients wants to make a contribution 
to them or anything like them.”).)  If indeed contractors can make such 
contributions, then the ban won’t be all that effective in stopping 
corruption.

[This post has been updated.]

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74090&title=Breaking%3A%20DC%20Circuit%20En%20Banc%20Unanimously%20Upholds%20Ban%20on%20Federal%20Contractor%20Contributions%20to%20Candidates&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Nonprofit Group Tied to Marco Rubio Raises Millions While Shielding
    Donors” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74088>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 8:50 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74088>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT reports. 
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/07/06/group-supporting-marco-rubio-raises-16-million-as-donors-are-shielded/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74088&title=%E2%80%9CNonprofit%20Group%20Tied%20to%20Marco%20Rubio%20Raises%20Millions%20While%20Shielding%20Donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law 
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>


    “On eve of historic voter suppression trial, battle lines are drawn
    in NC-NAACP v McCrory (Part I)” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74086>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 2:53 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74086>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

DocDawg 
<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/06/1399172/-On-eve-of-historic-voter-suppression-trial-battle-lines-are-drawn-in-NC-NAACP-v-McCrory-Part-I#>at 
Daily Kos.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74086&title=%E2%80%9COn%20eve%20of%20historic%20voter%20suppression%20trial%2C%20battle%20lines%20are%20drawn%20in%20NC-NAACP%20v%20McCrory%20%28Part%20I%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inDepartment of Justice 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>,election 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>


    “Here are the secret ways super PACs and campaigns can work
    together” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74084>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 1:36 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74084>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Matea 
Gold<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/here-are-the-secret-ways-super-pacs-and-campaigns-can-work-together/2015/07/06/bda78210-1539-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html>on 
how coordination does not really mean coordination.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74084&title=%E2%80%9CHere%20are%20the%20secret%20ways%20super%20PACs%20and%20campaigns%20can%20work%20together%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “State to review thousands of motor voter registration complaints”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74082>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 1:34 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74082>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The /Houston Chronicle /reports. 
<http://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/election/state/article/State-to-review-thousands-of-motor-voter-6365671.php?t=5f48a9011eb2e7d3f0&cmpid=twitter-premium>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74082&title=%E2%80%9CState%20to%20review%20thousands%20of%20motor%20voter%20registration%20complaints%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inNVRA (motor voter) <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>


    SCOTUS AZ Redistricting Case Affecting Arguments over Standing in
    Immigration Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74080>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 1:33 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74080>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Gerstein explains. 
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/07/feds-and-states-in-immigration-fight-split-on-scotus-210005.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74080&title=SCOTUS%20AZ%20Redistricting%20Case%20Affecting%20Arguments%20over%20Standing%20in%20Immigration%20Case&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Why Company Towns Are Bad for People”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74078>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 9:36 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74078>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Must read Victor Valle 
<http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2015/07/06/why-company-towns-are-bad-for-people/ideas/nexus/>at 
Zocalo on the most recent “election” in LA County’s “City of Industry.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74078&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20Company%20Towns%20Are%20Bad%20for%20People%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    “Supreme Court Sends Signals to Request Cases They Want to Hear”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74075>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 8:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74075>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New Adam Liptak Sidebar column: 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/07/us/supreme-court-sends-signals-to-request-cases-they-want-to-hear.html?smid=tw-share>

    Supreme Court
    <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/s/supreme_court/index.html?inline=nyt-org>justices
    like to say that they have no agenda. Cases come to them unbidden.
    They decide the ones that need deciding.

    The reality is more complicated. The justices sometimes use their
    opinions to send messages about the kinds of cases they would like
    to hear.

    Bat signals sent in the term that just ended included one from
    Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,who asked for a case
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-1428_1a7d.pdf>about
    solitary confinement, and another from Justices Stephen G. Breyer
    and Ruth Bader Ginsburg,who asked to consider
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-7955_aplc.pdf>the
    constitutionality of the death penalty.

    The next term, which starts in October, will feature three cases
    brought at least partly in response to similar invitations.

I have written about this phenomenon and related ways Supreme Court 
Justices try to move the law in*Anticipatory Overrulings, Invitations, 
Time Bombs, and Inadvertence: How Supreme Court Justices Move the Law, 
61/Emory Law Journal/779 (2012) 
<http://law.emory.edu/elj/content/volume-61/issue-4/thrower-symposium-articles/anticipatory-overrulings-invitations-time-bombs.html>. 
[corrected link]*

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74075&title=%E2%80%9CSupreme%20Court%20Sends%20Signals%20to%20Request%20Cases%20They%20Want%20to%20Hear%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Analysis: Despite Ruling, Redistricting Reformers Pessimistic”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74073>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 8:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74073>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ross Ramsey 
<http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/06/analysis-redistricting-reformers-hopeful-pessimist/>in 
the Texas Tribune:

    Texas does not have an independent redistricting commission and is
    probably not going to get one.

    But the lawmakers who have been ignoring the idea for years lost one
    of their excuses: In a 5-4decision
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-1314_3ea4.pdf>, the
    U.S. Supreme Court turned back a challenge to Arizona’s commission,
    saying the voters had the right to take that power away from
    legislators.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74073&title=%E2%80%9CAnalysis%3A%20Despite%20Ruling%2C%20Redistricting%20Reformers%20Pessimistic%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inElections Clause 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=70>,redistricting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “One for the People” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74071>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 8:11 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74071>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Steven Mazie 
<http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21656686-justices-let-arizonans-tackle-ancient-scourge-one-people>for 
/The Economist/on the SCOTUS AZ redistricting case.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74071&title=%E2%80%9COne%20for%20the%20People%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “The Health of State Democracies: Liberty and Justice for All?”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74069>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 8:08 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74069>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

D.C. Event Tuesday 
<https://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/2015/06/29/116128/the-health-of-state-democracies-liberty-and-justice-for-all/>:

    Please join the Center for American Progress Action Fund as it
    launches a new report on the health of state democracies.

    The U.S. Constitution guarantees certain rights and privileges
    within our democracy. In practice, however, the extent to which
    citizens experience the robust benefits of a truly democratic
    society is too often determined by decisions made at the state
    level. Examining the areas of accessibility of the ballot, strength
    of representation in state government, and influence in the
    political system, going off report “The Health of State Democracies”
    contends that these issues must be addressed in sum—and no longer in
    silos.

    Join the Center for American Progress Action Fund for a panel
    discussion with state policymakers and other democracy experts as
    they speak to the challenges and opportunities ahead—from in-state
    legislative and ballot measure campaigns, to removing structural
    barriers so that voters truly have a voice in the democratic
    process, to a broader look at the need to address these issues as a
    comprehensive package of pro-democracy reforms.

    /Featured panelists:/
    *Former Sen. Nina Turner*(D-OH)
    *Sen. Roger Katz
    <http://www.mainesenategop.com/index.php/your-senators/roger-katz>*(R-ME)
    *Del. Alfonso Lopez <http://www.alfonsolopez.org/about/>*(D-VA)
    Dara Lindenbaum
    , Senior Associate at Sandler Reiff Lamb Rosenstein & Birkenstock

    /Moderated by:/
    *Michele Jawando
    <https://www.americanprogress.org/about/staff/jawando-michele/bio/>*, Vice
    President for Legal Progress, Center for American Progress Action Fund

    //Coffee will be served at 9:30 a.m.//


          RSVP

    RSVP for this event →
    <https://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/2015/06/29/116128/the-health-of-state-democracies-liberty-and-justice-for-all/?evlc=rsvp>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74069&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Health%20of%20State%20Democracies%3A%20Liberty%20and%20Justice%20for%20All%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    “Walker office operating as if proposed open records exemptions are
    law” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74067>

Posted onJuly 6, 2015 7:29 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=74067>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

JS Online 
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/walker-office-operating-as-if-proposed-open-records-exemptions-are-law-b99532581z1-311737471.html>:

    Gov. Scott Walker announced over the weekend that Republicans would
    not create new exceptions to the state’s open records law, but for
    months the all-but-certain presidential candidate has been operating
    as if the exemptions were already in place.

    Two months ago, Walker declined to make public records related to
    his proposal to rewrite the University of Wisconsin System’s mission
    statement and release the Wisconsin Idea from state law. He argued
    he didn’t have to release those records to the Milwaukee Journal
    Sentinel and others because they were part of his office’s internal
    deliberations.

    The Progressive magazine and the Center for Media and Democracy sued
    Walker over those denials. The cases are pending in Dane County
    Circuit Court.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D74067&title=%E2%80%9CWalker%20office%20operating%20as%20if%20proposed%20open%20records%20exemptions%20are%20law%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

-- 
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/20150707/80ef8c34/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/20150707/80ef8c34/attachment.png>


View list directory