[EL] ELB News and Commentary 6/23/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Jun 22 19:59:53 PDT 2015
Just How Bad Is the Lack of Transparency at #SCOTUS?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73674>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 7:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73674>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CNN had to profusely and profoundly apologize
<http://www.politico.com//blogs/media/2015/06/cnns-gopro-antics-rile-supreme-court-209283.html>when
an intern running information to CNN’s reporters outside the Court from
the Courts public information office was wearing a Go Pro. What harm
could the intern have caused?
“The Supreme Court fears that a recording device may pick up audio of a
court decision.”
Oh. THE HORROR! THE HORROR!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73674&title=Just%20How%20Bad%20Is%20the%20Lack%20of%20Transparency%20at%20%23SCOTUS%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
New Lawsuit Challenging Presidential Debate Format
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73672>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 5:17 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73672>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
BAN
<http://ballot-access.org/2015/06/22/level-the-playing-field-libertarian-party-and-green-party-sue-fec-over-debates/>:
On June 22, Level the Playing Field, Peter Ackerman, the Libertarian
Party, and the Green Party,sued the Federal Election Commission
<http://ballot-access.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Ackerman-Libertarian-Green-complaint.pdf>in
U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. The case asks that the FEC
be required to consider the rule-making petition that Level the
Playing Field filed nine months ago over presidential general
election debates. The case was assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan,
an Obama appointee. It is styled Level the Playing Field v FEC,
15cv-961.
UPDATE:here is the Associated Press story.
<http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jun/22/lawsuit-filed-challenging-general-election-debate/>FURTHER
UPDATE:here is a New York Times mention of the lawsuit
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/22/third-party-groups-sue-f-e-c-to-try-to-open-up-presidential-debates/>.
The New York Times snidely added that over 300 people have said they
are running for President. It is unfortunate that the New York Times
reporter didn’t say that in the entire history of the United States,
there has never been a presidential general election with more than
7 candidates who had enough presidential elector candidates to
theoretically be elected by the Electoral College.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73672&title=New%20Lawsuit%20Challenging%20Presidential%20Debate%20Format&description=>
Posted inballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>,campaign
finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,third parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47>
CA Senate Unanimously Passes Resolution Supporting One Person, One
Vote and Opposing Evenwel #SCOTUS Case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73670>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 5:13 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73670>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The vote on the DeLeon bill
<http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SJR13&search_keywords=>was
36-0. it now moves to the Assembly.
Video excerpts
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa2w1Tl5uoU&feature=youtu.be>of debate
in CA state senate.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73670&title=CA%20Senate%20Unanimously%20Passes%20Resolution%20Supporting%20One%20Person%2C%20One%20Vote%20and%20Opposing%20Evenwel%20%23SCOTUS%20Case&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
SCOTUS Timing on TX Abortion Case: Will Justice Ginsburg Be Up Till
5 am Again? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73668>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 1:28 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73668>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lyle Denniston
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/06/texas-abortion-case-reaches-the-court/>reported
Friday on thisemergency stay petition
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Texas-abortion-stay-application-to-SCt-6-19-15.pdf>filed
by abortion rights plaintiffs in the litigation over Texas’s
controversial abortion restrictions. The petition was filed Friday, and
if the Court does not act, the challenged provisions of the law will go
into effect July 1.
So far, Justice Scalia (the Circuit Justice assigned to handle
emergencies from the 5th Circuit) has not asked for a response.
Eventually that should be coming, but it seems that that the order for a
response should come the sooner the better, with the rush to finish some
of the the most controversial and important cases of the Supreme Court’s
term over the next week. Then the Justices take off across the globe.
The situation reminded me of the emergency relief requested just before
the 2014 elections surrounding Texas’s voter id law. It led to a dissent
being issued by Justice Ginsburg at 5 am on a Saturday before the Monday
when early voting would start in Texas. NPR’s Nina Totenberg asked
Justice Ginsburg about the timing, and here wasJustice Ginsburg’s
explanation <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=67123>that it was because of
a delay from Justice Scalia’s chambers.
*Nina Totenberg*: Justice Ginsburg, you were up until … Friday
night/Saturday morning, writing a passionate dissent in the Texas
voter id case. Just to let people in the audience know, this was a
procedural question in some measure. And you can note a dissent in
those kinds of cases and not write and it is fairly common for that
to happen. But you wrote; you were joined by Justices Kagan and
Sotomayor. So why did you write and why did it take until 5 in the
morning?
*Justice Ginsburg*: Why till 5 in the morning? We didn’t get the
last filing from Texas until Friday morning and then the Circuit
Justice [Justice Scalia in this case—/Ed./] as you know has to write
a memo. And that came around some time in the middle of the
afternoon. So there wasn’t much time to write the dissent. I had
written a dissent in the North Carolina voting case, voting rights
case. This one was… I would say it was very well-reasoned. You
called it passionate.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73668&title=SCOTUS%20Timing%20on%20TX%20Abortion%20Case%3A%20Will%20Justice%20Ginsburg%20Be%20Up%20Till%205%20am%20Again%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“The FEC and the Breakdown of the Rule of Law”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73666>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 12:51 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73666>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs.
<https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/fec-and-breakdown-rule-law>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73666&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20FEC%20and%20the%20Breakdown%20of%20the%20Rule%20of%20Law%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“Democratic ‘Super PAC’ to Take On Koch Brothers”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73664>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 9:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73664>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/22/democratic-super-pac-to-take-on-koch-brothers/?ref=politics>:
A “super PAC” that focuses on opposition research is planning to
invest heavily in efforts to tie Republican candidates to the Koch
brothers, oil tycoons whom Democrats have maligned in the last three
national elections.
The strategy byAmerican Bridge 21st Century
<https://americanbridgepac.org/>, a group founded by David Brock, a
Hillary Rodham Clinton ally, represents a redoubling of efforts that
have had mixed results in recent election cycles and ignited some
controversy.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73664&title=%E2%80%9CDemocratic%20%E2%80%98Super%20PAC%E2%80%99%20to%20Take%20On%20Koch%20Brothers%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
State Lawsuit Against NC Voter ID Stalls with Changes in Law
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73662>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 9:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73662>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WRAL reports.
<http://www.wral.com/lawsuit-over-voter-id-stalls-after-legislative-changes/14730880/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73662&title=State%20Lawsuit%20Against%20NC%20Voter%20ID%20Stalls%20with%20Changes%20in%20Law&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
“Independent Expenditures in Congressional Primaries after Citizens
United” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73658>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 6:44 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73658>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
New draft working paper
<http://cfinst.org/pdf/papers/Boatright-Malbin-Glavin_IEs-in-Primaries-after-CU.pdf>from
Boatright, Malbin, and Glavinreleased by
<http://www.cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/15-06-22/INDEPENDENT_SPENDING_AFTER_CITIZENS_UNITED_HAD_UNPREDICTED_EFFECTS_IN_CONGRESSIONAL_PRIMARIES.aspx>the
Campaign Finance Institute. Abstract:
This paper examines how Citizens United affected the balance of
power in and among “outside” groups in congressional primaries
through 2014. After the decision, critics predicted massive
independent expenditures (IEs) by large corporations, while
supporters saw it shifting the balance toward insurgent outsiders.
While IEs were up, we expected and found neither of these effects.
Instead, the paper documents: (1) an unsurprising increase in the
number of (and decrease in the focused coordination among) IE
groups; (2) a substantial change in the types of groups that wield
power, with an increase in the importance of ones tied to party
leaders and decrease in the power of factional outsiders; and (3)
the emergence of single-candidate PACs, with the most significant
growth among those allied with incumbent office holders. The
heightened power of mega-donors with issue agendas, underwriting new
organizations, is important and well documented. But the changes
supporting visible party leaders and incumbents could also have
important systemic consequences over time.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73658&title=%E2%80%9CIndependent%20Expenditures%20in%20Congressional%20Primaries%20after%20Citizens%20United%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Now Available: Issacharoff’s “Fragile Democracies”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=70593>
Posted onJune 22, 2015 6:40 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=70593>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
[Bumping to the top and updating]
Now available
<http://www.amazon.com/Fragile-Democracies-Contested-Constitutional-Cambridge/dp/1107654548/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1425054934&sr=8-6&keywords=issacharoff>:
Fragile Democracies: Contested Power in the Era of Constitutional
Courts (Cambridge Studies in Election Law and Democracy)Paperback–
May 31, 2015
bySamuel Issacharoff
<http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1?ie=UTF8&field-author=Samuel+Issacharoff&search-alias=books&text=Samuel+Issacharoff&sort=relevancerank>(Author)
Twenty-five years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the democratic
ascendency of the post-Soviet era is under severe challenge. While
fragile democracies in Eastern Europe, Africa, and East Asia face
renewed threats, the world has witnessed the failed democratic
promises of the Arab Spring. What lessons can be drawn from these
struggles? What conditions or institutions are needed to prevent the
collapse of democracy? This book argues that the most significant
antidote to authoritarianism is the presence of strong
constitutional courts. Distinct in the third wave of
democratization, these courts serve as a bulwark against
vulnerability to external threats as well as internal consolidation
of power. Particular attention is given to societies riven by deep
divisions of race, religion, or national background, for which the
courts have become pivotal actors in allowing democracy to take root.
Excited to read this!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D70593&title=Now%20Available%3A%20Issacharoff%E2%80%99s%20%E2%80%9CFragile%20Democracies%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incomparative election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=107>
Will #SCOTUS Hear Renzi “Speech or Debate” Case, Impacting Federal
Case of Congressional Corruption, Next Term?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73655>
Posted onJune 21, 2015 8:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=73655>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
UPDATE: The Court has listed this case for its 6/25 conference, meaning
we could know by end of term whether it will take this case.
The Courtmay not decide
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/14-1082.htm>what
to do with this case before the end of this term, butRenzi v. U.S
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/renzi-v-united-states-2/>.
presents a meaty Speech or Debate clause issue, andthe amicus brief of
Stanley
Brand<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/14-1082-tsac-Brand-et-al.pdf>et
al. makes a compelling argument for the Court to take the case. Here is
the question presented:
(1) Whether legislative fact-finding by an individual Member of
Congress is a legislative act protected by the Speech or Debate
Clause; (2) whether a Member of Congress’ official actions to
develop, evaluate, and draft legislation that are undertaken prior
to the formal introduction of a bill are legislative acts protected
by the Speech or Debate Clause; and (3) whether a Member of Congress
can waive the protections of the Speech or Debate Clause only by
explicitly and unequivocally renouncing them.
At stake is how much the Speech or Debate clause limits prosecutions of
members of Congress for corrupt dealings by limiting proof of corruption
based on legislative acts.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D73655&title=Will%20%23SCOTUS%20Hear%20Renzi%20%E2%80%9CSpeech%20or%20Debate%E2%80%9D%20Case%2C%20Impacting%20Federal%20Case%20of%20Congressional%20Corruption%2C%20Next%20Term%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
--
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/20150622/38b9389a/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/20150622/38b9389a/attachment.png>
View list directory