[EL] ELB News and Commentary 6/18/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jun 17 20:59:34 PDT 2015
“The merits of universal voter registration”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73580>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 3:43 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73580>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Conor Friedersdorf LAT oped.
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0617-friedersdorf-universal-registration-20150617-story.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73580&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20merits%20of%20universal%20voter%20registration%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
Murphy: Super PAC Donors are “Killers;” Cannot Coordinate “Any More”
with Jeb! But “Well-Informed” as of Last Week
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73575>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 3:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73575>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mike Murphy
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/we-crashed-jeb-bushs-super-pacs-donor-call-and-heres-what-th#.wlBb1qlQ0>on
the crashed Right to Rise super pac conference call:
“So I can tell you, we are excited,” Murphy continued. “And, just
keep doing what you’re doing. And I keep coming back to this pitch,
because, like any ad guy, I believe in repetition: Any extra buck
you can give before June 30 is a weapon for us, in that report when
we give some heart attacks to people in July. It’ll effect some of
their decisions, it’ll bum out their donors, and it’ll hurt their
money, which cuts off their oxygen, and frankly we want to choke ‘em
all out. So, um, you’re killers — I’m gonna turn you guys loose to
that mission.”…
Murphy noted that he “can’t coordinate any more” with the campaign,
but said he was “well-informed as of a week ago.”
Murphy said Bush’s message would focus on three things: how to “make
this country an economic superpower again…” that Bush wants “blow up
the machine in Washington,” and “the world is more chaotic than
ever, we need an experienced president, who’s had the life training
to make our country safer, in a world that’s become more unstable.”
There is so much wrong with this it is hard to know where to begin.
Watch for the watchdogs’ complaints to be amended with this information.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73575&title=Murphy%3A%20Super%20PAC%20Donors%20are%20%E2%80%9CKillers%3B%E2%80%9D%20Cannot%20Coordinate%20%E2%80%9CAny%20More%E2%80%9D%20with%20Jeb%21%20But%20%E2%80%9CWell-Informed%E2%80%9D%20as%20of%20Last%20Week&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Conservatives Are Upset With Nevada Republicans For Failing To Pass
A Voter ID Bill” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73573>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 3:11 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73573>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
HuffPo reports.
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/17/nevada-voter-id_n_7604980.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73573&title=%E2%80%9CConservatives%20Are%20Upset%20With%20Nevada%20Republicans%20For%20Failing%20To%20Pass%20A%20Voter%20ID%20Bill%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“We Crashed Jeb Bush’s Super PAC’s Donor Call, And Here’s What They
Said” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73571>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 3:09 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73571>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
BuzzFeed.
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/we-crashed-jeb-bushs-super-pacs-donor-call-and-heres-what-th#.teBemgda6>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73571&title=%E2%80%9CWe%20Crashed%20Jeb%20Bush%E2%80%99s%20Super%20PAC%E2%80%99s%20Donor%20Call%2C%20And%20Here%E2%80%99s%20What%20They%20Said%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
A Key Thing to Watch if Government Loses at SCOTUS in King v.
Burwell <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73568>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 3:00 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73568>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
As the Supreme Court gets ready to decide this key Obamacare case, watch
if Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Kennedy (f they make up a majority
holding subsidies cannot apply to those in the federal exchange) engage
in the total fiction that Congress can easily fix the Act. It is not
going to happen, because congressional overrides of Supreme Court
statutory decisions have fallen off a cliff, especially when it comes to
contentious partisan issues (and fewer issues are more contentious these
days than Obamacare). Pretending Congress will fix it is a Court that is
willfully blind to modern political realities. (And on why the Court
should take those realities into account in interpreting the Act,
seethis piece at Slate
<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>.)
In an LA Times oped
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-roberts-supreme-court-obamacare-20141113-story.html> on
the case back in October, I wrote the following:
One argument [Chief Justice Roberts] might make in defense of that
position is that Congress has the ability to go back and fix any
unclear language through a revised statute.
Roberts telegraphed his willingness to take such an approach in the
2013Shelby County v
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/>s.
Holder
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/>case,
which struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. The
provision the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional defined which
states had to get federal approval (or pre-clearance) before making
changes to their voting laws. Roberts’ opinion for the majority
ordered the provision struck because it was based on old data.
Congress, he reasoned, could simply update the formula to respond to
“current conditions” if it wished to.
When Roberts wrote his Shelby County opinion,he knew full well
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/04/symposium-does-the-chief-justice-not-understand-politics-or-does-he-understand-it-all-too-well/>that
Congress would not update the coverage formula. Congress is
polarized, and the issue was a political hot potato. Indeed, in the
period since the opinion, a bill introduced to update the Voting
Rights Acthas gone nowhere
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/katenocera/judiciary-chairman-in-no-rush-to-move-on-voting-rights-act-r>.
It is supported by Democrats and a sole Republican, Jim
Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.).
Although Congress used to come forward on a bipartisan basis to
change laws in response to Supreme Court rulings, the number of such
overrides hasfallen to a trickle
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us/politics/supreme-court-gains-power-from-paralysis-of-congress.html>.
From 1975 to 1990, Congress overrode an average of 12 Supreme Court
decisions in each two-year congressional cycle. In the last decade,
thatnumber has fallen
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2130190>to 2.7
every two years, and there have been no significant overrides during
the Obama presidency since Republicans took over the House of
Representatives. During the last two years, perhaps owing to the
intensity of the current political polarization and paralysis,
overrides have been even rarer. I have identifiedjust one override
<https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1603>,
which pertained to a single Indian tribe’s right to certain tribal
lands….
In today’s fraught political environment, court-Congress dialogues
are not generally possible. But that might not stop Roberts from
citing the possibility of such a dialogue — especially if what he
is really seeking is political cover and a chance to redeem his
controversial earlier ruling on the Affordable Care Act with a new
one that hobbles a key part of the law.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73568&title=A%20Key%20Thing%20to%20Watch%20if%20Government%20Loses%20at%20SCOTUS%20in%20King%20v.%20Burwell&description=>
Posted instatutory interpretation
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Bipartisan Group Urges Overhaul of General Election Debates”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73566>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 9:36 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73566>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/17/bipartisan-group-urges-overhaul-of-general-election-debates/?ref=politics>on
an Annenbeg-led effort that seems quite sensible. Anita Dunn and Beth
Myers co-chair, and Bauer and Ginsberg have a hand too.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73566&title=%E2%80%9CBipartisan%20Group%20Urges%20Overhaul%20of%20General%20Election%20Debates%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“New Pew Infographic Demystifies Voting Information Project Data
Flow” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73564>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 8:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73564>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
A ChapinBlog.
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2015/06/new_pew_infographic_demystifie.php>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73564&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20Pew%20Infographic%20Demystifies%20Voting%20Information%20Project%20Data%20Flow%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“President Obama and arguments about pending Supreme Court cases”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73562>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 8:42 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73562>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josh Blackman finds
<http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/06/president-obama-and-arguments-about-pending-supreme-court-cases/>President
Obama much more likely to make comments about pending Supreme Court
cases than his predecessors.
I’ve argued <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73414>that’s a good thing.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73562&title=%E2%80%9CPresident%20Obama%20and%20arguments%20about%20pending%20Supreme%20Court%20cases%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Today’s Must Read: Mann and Dionne, “The Futility of Nostalgia and
the Romanticism of the New Political Realists”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73560>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 8:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73560>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Tom Mann and EJ Dionne <http://brook.gs/1GcuFf8>take on Rauch, Pildes,
Cain, LaRaja and Persily.
This is a very important contribution to a key debate about the reform
project. It is the best explanation of the ironic romanticism in the
anti-reform camp. I expect there will be further responses.
Here is a brief description of the project:
In a spirited response to**Jonathan Rauch’s argument in favor of
restoring machine politics*
<http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/05/political-realism-rauch>,*Thomas
Mann and E.J. Dionne, Jr. assert that those who are being labeled
“political realists” in fact have a romantic view of politics and
are fundamentally mistaken in their diagnosis of what ails American
democracy. Mann and Dionne contend that political realist proposed
solutions would aggravate – rather than cure- American political
dysfunction.
Rauch and the realists have a core difficulty, Mann and Dionne
write: Problems realists frequently ascribe to the political reform
era after Watergate did not actually appear until the post-Watergate
reforms began to break down. Rather, the American political system
hit a crisis point later, most dramatically during President Obama’s
time in office, when asymmetric polarization took hold, the
Republican Party radicalized, and the intense competition between
the parties for control of Congress and the White House drove the
oppositional politics of today.
Moreover, realists’ focus on procedural matters also overlooks the
importance of many other social and political changes over the last
several decades, including the growing role of television and other
technologies in political campaigns, the emergence of much of the
South as a one-party Republican political bastion, the impact of
civil rights in realigning American politics, and growing
polarization of public opinion along racial, ethnic and generational
lines. These substantive changes matter far more than the question
of whether it has become harder to make a back-room deal, these
authors argue. Mann and Dionne also argue in calling for more
centralized control of the legislative process, Rauch ignores the
enormous centralization of power that has already taken place in
Congress, particularly in the House, since the mid-1990s. Far from
promoting concord, centralization has produced less of it.
Mann and Dionne assert that:
*
Realists offer an idealized view of the American past — and of
political machines in particular — that bears little
relationship to how earlier American systems worked, and failed
to work.
*
They utterly misunderstand the relationship of big money to
politics.
*
The realists willfully ignore that political polarization in the
United States is asymmetric.
*
There is no dispute over the fact that our two major political
partiers have sorted themselves ideologically, but a true
realism would come to terms with this development, not pretend
that our parties can once again become philosophically polyglot
coalitions.
*
Many of the realists, usually implicitly but sometimes
explicitly, seem to long for a return to Gilded Age politics,
precisely what the United States needs to move away from now.
*
Mann and Dionne reject the easy use of terms such as “democratic
romanticism” and “populism” to describe what ails our political
system, arguing that it suffers most of all from a “democratic
deficit.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73560&title=Today%E2%80%99s%20Must%20Read%3A%20Mann%20and%20Dionne%2C%20%E2%80%9CThe%20Futility%20of%20Nostalgia%20and%20the%20Romanticism%20of%20the%20New%20Political%20Realists%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>,theory
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=41>
Political Activity Law Goes on Hiatus
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73558>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 8:00 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73558>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This is too bad.
<http://politicalactivitylaw.com/2015/06/16/a-message-to-the-friends-of-politicalactivitylaw-com/>I
rely greatly on Eric Brown’s roundup of money in politics news from
around the country.
Good luck Eric!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73558&title=Political%20Activity%20Law%20Goes%20on%20Hiatus&description=>
Posted inelection law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>
“BPC Applauds Enactment of Texas Bill to Improve Voter List
Accuracy” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73556>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:56 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73556>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release
<http://bipartisanpolicy.org/press-release/bpc-applauds-enactment-of-texas-bill-to-improve-voter-list-accuracy/>:
The Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) applauds the enactment of new
legislation in Texas which provides for the state to participate in
multi-state voter registration data-sharing programs. Texas Governor
Greg Abbott signed the bill, SB 795, into law Monday.
“Voter registration data sharing can be key in improving the
accuracy of a state’s voter rolls,” said John Fortier, director of
BPC’s Democracy Project. “The ability to update and check voter
registration lists against other states allows for the
identification of duplicate registrations in multiple states.”
Participation in multi-state voter registration data sharing was a
key recommendation of the*Presidential Commission on Election
Administration
<http://link.bipartisanpolicy.org/c/1/?aId=11743737&requestId=b16815-23395bdb-85aa-494c-bf98-b02a3030fe88&rId=contact-38c3186b1d96e2118aa478e3b510fdbd-3052891083924582ad843127eec42f69&uId=1&ea=xpynat%3Dbet%3Dovcnegvfnacbyvpl&dUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fbipartisanpolicy.org%2Fthe-presidential-commission-on-election-administration%2F%3F_cldee%3Da2NsYW5nQGJpcGFydGlzYW5wb2xpY3kub3Jn%26utm_source%3DClickDimensions%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3DPress%2520Update%2520%257C%2520Democracy%2520Project>*(PCEA),
whose work*BPC is continuing
<http://link.bipartisanpolicy.org/c/1/?aId=11743737&requestId=b16815-23395bdb-85aa-494c-bf98-b02a3030fe88&rId=contact-38c3186b1d96e2118aa478e3b510fdbd-3052891083924582ad843127eec42f69&uId=2&ea=xpynat%3Dbet%3Dovcnegvfnacbyvpl&dUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fbipartisanpolicy.org%2Fthe-presidential-commission-on-election-administration%2F%3F_cldee%3Da2NsYW5nQGJpcGFydGlzYW5wb2xpY3kub3Jn%26utm_source%3DClickDimensions%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3DPress%2520Update%2520%257C%2520Democracy%2520Project>*,
and BPC’s*Commission on Political Reform
<http://link.bipartisanpolicy.org/c/1/?aId=11743737&requestId=b16815-23395bdb-85aa-494c-bf98-b02a3030fe88&rId=contact-38c3186b1d96e2118aa478e3b510fdbd-3052891083924582ad843127eec42f69&uId=3&ea=xpynat%3Dbet%3Dovcnegvfnacbyvpl&dUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fbipartisanpolicy.org%2Fcpr%3F_cldee%3Da2NsYW5nQGJpcGFydGlzYW5wb2xpY3kub3Jn%26utm_source%3DClickDimensions%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3DPress%2520Update%2520%257C%2520Democracy%2520Project>*.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73556&title=%E2%80%9CBPC%20Applauds%20Enactment%20of%20Texas%20Bill%20to%20Improve%20Voter%20List%20Accuracy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Writing Campaign Finance Rules: Between ‘Thorough’ Regulation or
None at All” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73554>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73554>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer’s latest.
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/06/writing-campaign-finance-rules-thorough-regulation-none/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73554&title=%E2%80%9CWriting%20Campaign%20Finance%20Rules%3A%20Between%20%E2%80%98Thorough%E2%80%99%20Regulation%20or%20None%20at%20All%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Coalitions of the willing are latest lobbying trend”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73552>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:52 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73552>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/06/16/coalitions-of-the-willing-are-latest-lobbying-trend/>:
A powerful coalition of labor and environmental groups known as the
Coalition to Stop Fast Track was one of the most influential players
in bringing down fast-track trade legislation last week.*
*
Its creation, and clout, highlight how many of Washington’s biggest
legislative and regulatory battles are now fought — via coalitions
of the like-minded, at least on issues of convenience. These
coalitions also serve as lucrative vehicles for K Street to do business.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73552&title=%E2%80%9CCoalitions%20of%20the%20willing%20are%20latest%20lobbying%20trend%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
“Shareholders press for information about political spending”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73550>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:50 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73550>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Nicklaus column.
<http://www.stltoday.com/business/columns/david-nicklaus/shareholders-press-for-information-about-political-spending/article_8fbcdc4a-c77b-5337-a89a-375ab64932b7.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73550&title=%E2%80%9CShareholders%20press%20for%20information%20about%20political%20spending%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Pillar of Law Institute Files Brief in Washington Free Speech Case”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73548>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:49 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73548>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release
<https://www.pillaroflaw.org/index.php/blog/entry/pillar-of-law-institute-files-brief-in-washington-free-speech-case>:
The Pillar of Law Institutefiled a friend-of-the-court brief with
the United States Supreme Court
<https://www.pillaroflaw.org/images/Article_PDFs/POLI-Utter_v._BIAW_brief-filed.pdf>today
in the case/Utter v. Building Industry Association of
Washington/(BIAW), urging the Court to hear the case and reinforce
free speech protections against burdensome campaign finance laws.
The brief argues that organizations such as BIAW should not be
subject to comprehensive campaign finance disclosure laws since they
do not have the major purpose of engaging in elections.
“A group should not become a political committee, or PAC simply by
engaging in some election-related speech,” said Benjamin Barr, lead
attorney for Pillar of Law. “But in Washington State,
election-related speech is burdened to the point of silence and it
will stay that way unless the Supreme Court hears this case.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73548&title=%E2%80%9CPillar%20of%20Law%20Institute%20Files%20Brief%20in%20Washington%20Free%20Speech%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Voting Rights Advocates Settle Long-Running Voter Registration
Suit” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73546>
Posted onJune 17, 2015 7:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73546>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Press release
<http://www.projectvote.org/newsreleases/1134-voting-rights-advocates-settle-long-running-voter-registration-suit.html>:
Voting rights advocates and Massachusetts officials announced today
that settlements have been reached in a three-year old federal
lawsuit regarding the requirement to provide voter registration
opportunities to low-income citizens who receive public assistance
benefits.
The lawsuit, filed in May 2012, was brought by New England United
for Justice (NEU4J) and the New England Area Conference of the NAACP
(NAACP-NEAC) against the Secretary of the Commonwealth (SOC), the
Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA), the Office of Medicaid
(MassHealth), and the Executive Office of Health and Human Services
(EOHHS). It alleged that the state’s public assistance agencies were
failing to provide voter registration services that are mandated by
the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The NVRA is the same law
that requires voter registration services to be provided when a
citizen applies for a driver’s license.
“After years of negotiations, strategic planning, and the litigation
process, we are excited to put a successful close to our lawsuit,”
stated Noemi Ramos, Executive Director of NEU4J. “This was about
protecting the rights of low-income people in the Commonwealth to
access voter registration.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73546&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20Rights%20Advocates%20Settle%20Long-Running%20Voter%20Registration%20Suit%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inNVRA (motor voter) <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>,voter
registration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
--
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/20150617/3db86b2e/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/20150617/3db86b2e/attachment.png>
View list directory