[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/20/15 (and see update on DOJ/Wisconsin voter id item)
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Fri Mar 20 07:49:23 PDT 2015
Rick Perry Slips and Refers to Himself as “the Candidate”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71167>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71167>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Des Moines Register
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/03/19/rick-perry-west-des-moines/25056281/>:
Because he’s not a declared presidential candidate yet, Perry in his
prepared remarks at a Dallas County GOP event Thursday evening was
careful to say he’s in Iowa to push for the election of all
constitutional conservatives — in state government, in Congress and
“obviously, the president of the United States.”
But he slipped up in a question-and-answer session when a reporter
asked him about remarks one of his new aides had made in 2011. “I’m
the candidate,” Perry stressed. “And my views are the ones that
matter, not” those ofJamie Johnson, whose hire
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/03/18/white-house-hopeful-rick-perry-makes-fifth-hire-iowa/24973255/>was
announced Wednesday.
(h/tPolitical Wire
<http://politicalwire.com/2015/03/20/quote-of-the-day-880/>)
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71167&title=Rick%20Perry%20Slips%20and%20Refers%20to%20Himself%20as%20%E2%80%9Cthe%20Candidate%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends; Foundation agreed not to
seek donations from other governments, but cash kept flowing from
individuals with connections to them”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71165>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:43 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71165>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ reports.
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-tapped-foreign-friends-1426818602>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71165&title=%E2%80%9CClinton%20Charity%20Tapped%20Foreign%20Friends%3B%20Foundation%20agreed%20not%20to%20seek%20donations%20from%20other%20governments%2C%20but%20cash%20kept%20flowing%20from%20individuals%20with%20connections%20to%20them%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Push to restore voting rights for felons gathers momentum”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71163>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:41 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71163>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Zack
Roth<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/push-restore-voting-rights-felons-gathers-momentum>for
MSNBC.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71163&title=%E2%80%9CPush%20to%20restore%20voting%20rights%20for%20felons%20gathers%20momentum%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted infelon voting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=66>
“McConnell Makes Changes, but Senate Gridlock Remains”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71161>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:40 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71161>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/21/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-makes-changes-but-senate-gridlock-remains.html?ref=politics>:
WASHINGTON — When he became majority leader, propelled by sweeping
Republican victories last year, SenatorMitch McConnell
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/mitch_mcconnell/index.html?inline=nyt-per>of
Kentucky vowed to run a more productive and traditional Senate than
his Democratic predecessor, SenatorHarry Reid
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/harry_reid/index.html?inline=nyt-per>of
Nevada.
In some ways, that has come to pass. Democrats have been given
greater opportunity to amend bills than Republicans had when Mr.
Reid had a majority. Mr. McConnell promised there would be no
government shutdown, and he averted one over funding the Department
of Homeland Security. And, occasionally, senators now have to work
on Fridays.
But when it comes to the central role of a Senate leader — getting
things done — Mr. McConnell has been impeded by internal struggles
in his party and the hostility that awaits him across the aisle.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71161&title=%E2%80%9CMcConnell%20Makes%20Changes%2C%20but%20Senate%20Gridlock%20Remains%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,political polarization
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>
Two Pinocchios for Netanyahu Claim that ‘tens of millions’ in
foreign money was aimed against him
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71159>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:37 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71159>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/20/netanyahus-claim-that-tens-of-millions-in-foreign-money-was-aimed-against-him/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71159&title=Two%20Pinocchios%20for%20Netanyahu%20Claim%20that%20%E2%80%98tens%20of%20millions%E2%80%99%20in%20foreign%20money%20was%20aimed%20against%20him&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Should Voter Registration Be Automatic?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71157>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71157>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Russell Berman
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/should-voter-registration-be-automatic/388258/>for
The Atlantic.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71157&title=%E2%80%9CShould%20Voter%20Registration%20Be%20Automatic%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter registration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
“The RightsCast, Episode 7: Josh Douglas, “How Should Courts Police
Election Laws?”” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71155>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:30 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71155>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The latest in Nancy Leong’s YouTubeseries
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5sHR2kEbIk>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71155&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20RightsCast%2C%20Episode%207%3A%20Josh%20Douglas%2C%20%E2%80%9CHow%20Should%20Courts%20Police%20Election%20Laws%3F%E2%80%9D%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted intheory <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=41>
“Leveling the Playing Field? The Role of Public Campaign Funding in
Elections” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71153>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:28 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71153>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Tilman Klumpp, Hugo Mialon, and Michael Williams have postedthis draft
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2576441>on SSRN
(forthcoming, /American Law and Economics Review/).
In a series of First Amendment cases, the U.S. Supreme Court
established that government may regulate campaign finance, but not
if regulation imposes costs on political speech and the purpose of
regulation is to “level the political playing field.” The Court has
applied this principle to limit the ways in which governments can
provide public campaign funding to candidates in elections. A
notable example is the Court’s decision to strike down matching
funds provisions of public funding programs (Arizona Free Enterprise
Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, 2011). In this paper, we develop
a contest-theoretic model of elections in which we analyze the
effects of public campaign funding mechanisms, including a simple
public option and a public option with matching funds, on program
participation, political speech, and election outcomes. We show that
a public option with matching funds is equivalent to a simple public
option with a lump-sum transfer equal to the maximum level of
funding under the matching program; that a public option does not
always “level the playing field” but may make it more uneven and can
decrease as well as increase the quantity of political speech by all
candidates, depending on the maximum public funding level; and that
a public option tends to increase speech in cases where it levels
the playing field. Several of the Supreme Court’s arguments in
Arizona Free Enterprise are discussed in light of our theoretical
results.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71153&title=%E2%80%9CLeveling%20the%20Playing%20Field%3F%20The%20Role%20of%20Public%20Campaign%20Funding%20in%20Elections%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Corporate Speech and the First Amendment: History, Data, and
Implications” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71151>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:26 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71151>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2566785>looks
like a must-read from John Coates:
This Article draws on empirical analysis, history, and economic
theory to show that corporations have begun to displace individuals
as direct beneficiaries of the First Amendment and to outline an
argument that the shift reflects economically harmful rent seeking.
The history of corporations, regulation of commercial speech, and
First Amendment case law is retold, with an emphasis on the role of
constitutional entrepreneur Justice Lewis Powell, who prompted the
Supreme Court to invent corporate and commercial speech rights. The
chronology shows that First Amendment doctrine long post-dated both
pervasive regulation of commercial speech and the rise of the U.S.
as the world’s leading economic power – a chronology with
implications for originalists, and for policy. Supreme Court and
Courts of Appeals decisions are analyzed to quantify the degree to
which corporations have displaced individuals as direct
beneficiaries of First Amendment rights, and to show that they have
done so recently, but with growing speed since Virginia Pharmacy,
Bellotti, and Central Hudson. Nearly half of First Amendment
challenges now benefit business corporations and trade groups,
rather than other kinds of organizations or individuals, and the
trend-line is up. Such cases commonly constitute a form of
corruption: the use of litigation by managers to entrench
reregulation in their personal interests at the expense of
shareholders, consumers, and employees. In aggregate, they degrade
the rule of law, rendering it less predictable, general and clear.
This corruption risks significant economic harms in addition to the
loss of a republican form of government.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71151&title=%E2%80%9CCorporate%20Speech%20and%20the%20First%20Amendment%3A%20History%2C%20Data%2C%20and%20Implications%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Measuring Illegal and Legal Corruption in American States: Some
Results from the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics Corruption in
America Survey” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71149>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71149>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Oguzhan Dincer and Michael Johnston have postedthis
draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2579300>on
SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Using data from the “Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics Corruption in
America Survey”, we construct indices measuring two specific forms
of corruption across American states: illegal and legal. We define
illegal corruption as the private gains in the form of cash or gifts
by a government official, in exchange for providing specific
benefits to private individuals or groups, and legal corruption as
the political gains in the form of campaign contributions or
endorsements by a government official, in exchange for providing
specific benefits to private individuals or groups, be it by
explicit or implicit understanding. We then put our indices to work
and investigate why some states are more corrupt than the others. In
addition to demographic and economic variables we also investigate
how political participation effects corruption depending on how well
it is covered by the media. Our results suggest that we have a lot
to learn about the politics of corruption control.
I’m working on a paper on this topic posting soon, reaching similar
conclusions. Looking forward to reading this.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71149&title=%E2%80%9CMeasuring%20Illegal%20and%20Legal%20Corruption%20in%20American%20States%3A%20Some%20Results%20from%20the%20Edmond%20J.%20Safra%20Center%20for%20Ethics%20Corruption%20in%20America%20Survey%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Bauer on Abrams, Tribe, and Citizens United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71147>
Posted onMarch 20, 2015 7:13 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71147>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Worth the read.
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/03/looking-back-citizens-united/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71147&title=Bauer%20on%20Abrams%2C%20Tribe%2C%20and%20Citizens%20United&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Louisiana is so poor that Bobby Jindal’s budget won’t fund
presidential primaries in 2016″ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71145>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 8:36 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71145>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Wapo.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/03/19/louisiana-is-so-poor-that-it-cant-afford-to-hold-presidential-primaries-in-2016/?wprss=rss_politics>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71145&title=%E2%80%9CLouisiana%20is%20so%20poor%20that%20Bobby%20Jindal%E2%80%99s%20budget%20won%E2%80%99t%20fund%20presidential%20primaries%20in%202016%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“WyLiberty Attorneys File Brief in Wisconsin Free Speech Case”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71143>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 8:28 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71143>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release
<http://wyliberty.org/feature/wyliberty-attorneys-file-brief-in-wisconsin-free-speech-case/>:
Wyoming Liberty Group attorneys filed an/amicus curiae/
<http://wyliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Wisconsin-John-Doe.pdf>(friend-of-the-court)
brief in the Wisconsin Supreme Court today in/Three Unnamed
Petitioners v. Peterson/
<http://wyliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Wisconsin-John-Doe.pdf>,
a case consolidated with two others in what has become known as the
“Wisconsin John Doe Investigation.” The prosecution in each case
alleges illegal campaign finance coordination between political
groups and ostensibly members of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s
campaign. WyLiberty’s brief argues that Wisconsin law governing
coordination is unconstitutionally overbroad, and the latest effort
to criminalize political participation.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71143&title=%E2%80%9CWyLiberty%20Attorneys%20File%20Brief%20in%20Wisconsin%20Free%20Speech%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“U.S. House Judiciary Republicans Post ‘Ditzy Girl’ GIFs on Official
Committee Website” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71140>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 8:22 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71140>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
So embarrassing.
Brad blog <http://bradblog.com/?p=11085>links tothis.
<http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/3/at-the-flick-of-a-switch>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71140&title=%E2%80%9CU.S.%20House%20Judiciary%20Republicans%20Post%20%E2%80%98Ditzy%20Girl%E2%80%99%20GIFs%20on%20Official%20Committee%20Website%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Jeb Bush lawyer tries to stop radio ads touting Bush campaign”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71137>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 5:39 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71137>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Reuters reports.
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/19/us-usa-bush-ad-idUSKBN0MF00Y20150319>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71137&title=%E2%80%9CJeb%20Bush%20lawyer%20tries%20to%20stop%20radio%20ads%20touting%20Bush%20campaign%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“FEC Ruling Allows Foreign Volunteers To Provide PAC With
Intellectual Property” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71135>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 5:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71135>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/display/link_res.adp?lt=email&fname=A0G3V3W8F2&lf=eml&emc=mpdm:mpdm:109>:
The Federal Election Commission voted 4-2 to approve a
controversial, long-pending advisory opinion allowing a political
action committee to receive intellectual property produced by
foreign volunteers.
The vote at an FEC open meeting March 19 fell mainly along party
lines, with one Democratic commissioner, FEC Chairwoman Ann Ravel,
joining the three FEC Republicans to approve the ruling. Two
commissioners holding Democratic seats, Steven Walther and Ellen
Weintraub, dissented.
Approved was an advisory opinion (AO 2014-20) allowing a political
action committee called Make Your Laws, or MYL PAC, to receive
computer services from foreigners using open-source code, which
could then become the intellectual property of the PAC.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71135&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20Ruling%20Allows%20Foreign%20Volunteers%20To%20Provide%20PAC%20With%20Intellectual%20Property%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
Two Election Law Cases Lead off @SCOTUSBlog’s Petitions to Watch
List for Mar. 20 Conference <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71133>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 5:23 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71133>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/03/petitions-to-watch-conference-of-march-20/#more-226212>:
Frank v. Walker
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/frank-v-walker/>
14-803
*/Issue:/*(1) Whether a state’s voter ID law violates the Equal
Protection Clause where, unlike in/Crawford v. Marion County
Election Board
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-21.ZO.html>/, the
evidentiary record establishes that the law substantially burdens
the voting rights of hundreds of thousands of the state’s voters,
and that the law does not advance a legitimate state interest; and
(2) whether a state’s voter ID law violates Section 2 of the Voting
Rights Act where the law disproportionately burdens and abridges the
voting rights of African-American and Latino voters compared to
White voters.
Arneson v. 281 Care Committee
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/arneson-v-281-care-committee/>
14-779
*/Issue:/*Whether and to what extent false statements of fact, which
are designed to deceive voters, are protected by the Free Speech
Clause of the First Amendment.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71133&title=Two%20Election%20Law%20Cases%20Lead%20off%20%40SCOTUSBlog%E2%80%99s%20Petitions%20to%20Watch%20List%20for%20Mar.%2020%20Conference&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Meet the top politicians, mega-donors who mingled at secretive
conference” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71131>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 5:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71131>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CPI reports.
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/03/19/16927/meet-top-politicians-mega-donors-who-mingled-secretive-conference>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71131&title=%E2%80%9CMeet%20the%20top%20politicians%2C%20mega-donors%20who%20mingled%20at%20secretive%20conference%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“News Analysis: Special elections continue to pile up”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71129>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 5:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71129>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
That’s the lead
story<http://www.electionline.org/index.php/electionline-weekly>in this
week’s Electionline Weekly.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71129&title=%E2%80%9CNews%20Analysis%3A%20Special%20elections%20continue%20to%20pile%20up%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“The Oregon Trail:The state’s new governor is going on the offensive
in the battle for voting rights.” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71127>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 4:48 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71127>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Alec MacGillis writes
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/03/kate_brown_and_automatic_voter_registration_oregon_s_new_governor_has_gone.html>for
Slate.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71127&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Oregon%20Trail%3AThe%20state%E2%80%99s%20new%20governor%20is%20going%20on%20the%20offensive%20in%20the%20battle%20for%20voting%20rights.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter registration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
“Kentucky’s Rand Paul caucus problem”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71125>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 9:28 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71125>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Joshua Spivak
<http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/236177-kentuckys-rand-paul-caucus-problem#.VQr4XRqScC8.twitter>at
The Hill.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71125&title=%E2%80%9CKentucky%E2%80%99s%20Rand%20Paul%20caucus%20problem%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
“Voting Rights Advocates Settle Voter Registration Suit”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71123>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 9:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71123>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Press release
<http://projectvote.org/newsreleases/1122-voting-rights-advocates-settle-voter-registration-suit.html>:
“Today, voting rights advocates announced a settlement with the
Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA) that will
ensure that hundreds of thousands of eligible Massachusetts citizens are
provided opportunities to register to vote in compliance with the
National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). In light of the settlement, the
parties have jointly requested that U.S. District Court Judge Denise J.
Casper enter an order dismissing the claims against the DTA. The
settlement will become effective when Judge Casper enters the requested
order.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71123&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20Rights%20Advocates%20Settle%20Voter%20Registration%20Suit%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,NVRA (motor voter)
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>,voter registration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
“Democracy 21 Model Bill Would Shut Down Individual-Candidate Super
PACs and Prevent Coordination between Outside Spending Groups and
Candidates” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71121>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 9:24 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71121>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See here
<http://www.democracy21.org/legislative-action/press-releases-legislative-action/democracy-21-model-bill-would-shut-down-individual-candidate-super-pacs-and-prevent-coordination-between-outside-spending-groups-and-candidates/>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71121&title=%E2%80%9CDemocracy%2021%20Model%20Bill%20Would%20Shut%20Down%20Individual-Candidate%20Super%20PACs%20and%20Prevent%20Coordination%20between%20Outside%20Spending%20Groups%20and%20Candidates%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
DOJ’s Silence on the Wisconsin Voter ID Case Before SCOTUS
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71116>
Posted onMarch 19, 2015 8:09 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71116>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Linda Greenhouse
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/opinion/the-supreme-courts-identity-crisis-on-voting-rights.html?ref=opinion>joins
thechorus <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=70220>of people calling for the
Supreme Court to agree to hearFrank v. Walker
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/14-803.htm>,
the Wisconsin voter id case,up for a Supreme Court conference
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=70903> vote on Friday. (I think it is
very unlikely we will hear anything Monday, when the Court next issues
orders. If the court is seriously considering the case, it has been
taking two conferences to vet the cases to make sure they are
appropriate vehicles to hear issues. If there is a cert. denial, I would
expect a dissent from that decision, given Justice Ginsburg’s earlier
strong dissent
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/10/ginsburg_s_dissent_in_texas_voter_id_law_supreme_court_order.html>in
the Texas case).
But conspicuously absent from theset of filings
<http://advancementproject.org/pages/wi-scotus-amici-curiae> from amici
calling for the Supreme Court to hear the case is the United States
Department of Justice. DOJ’s failure to support the cert. petition
stands in sharp contrast to the Texas voter id case and the challenge to
North Carolina’s strict voting case, where DOJ is an active participant
beginning at he level of the trial court. It is also in contrast with
DOJ filing anamicus
brief<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Frank41.pdf>in
the 7th Circuit in the Wisconsin case, urging the 7th Circuit to affirm
a lower court holding that Wisconsin’s law violated both Section 2 of
the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
What explains DOJ’s silence? Within the voting rights community, the
decision to seek cert. in the Wisconsin case is controversial. To win,
it requires the Court to either expand the scope of the Voting Rights
Act section 2 in thevote denial case
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=896786>s or to
reinvigorate the equal protection clause in the context of voting rights
beyond that which the Court did in the /Crawford v. Marion County/case.
Crawford, like Frank, came up from the 7th Circuit as a horrible opinion
from a Seventh Circuit judge. I wrote anoped in the /Washington
Post/<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/18/AR2007091801572.html>urging
the Supreme Court to take the case. It did, and the Supreme Court made
things worse. Crawford was essentially a green light for ever more
restrictive voter id laws.
Why should now be different? The Frank decision is also horrible. But
the judge who wrote the horrible Crawford opinion in the Seventh
Circuit,Judge Posner,
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/23/why-judge-posner-is-right-on-voter-id-laws.html>had
a revelation that voter id laws were about voter suppression rather than
fraud prevention. Judge Posner wrote a fiery dissent in the Wisconsin
case now, and the 7th circuit [corrrected] divided 5-5 on whether to
rehear the Wisconsin case en banc. Those supporting the cert. petition
in the Wisconsin case, like Linda Greenhouse, are betting that Justice
Kennedy and/or Chief Justice Roberts will have a similar revelation on
voter id. That’s a big, big bet.
Compare that to Texas. In the Texas voter id case, now pending before
the 5th Circuit, we have a holding that Texas’s passage of the voter id
law was the product of intentional racial discrimination. That’s a
finding which should be very hard to reverse on appeal. it provides an
easier constitutional path for the Supreme Court to strike down Texas’s
voter id law. The upside of that would be a Supreme Court decision
striking down a voter id law on constitutional grounds. The downside is
that other cases, like Wisconsin, do not involve intentional
discrimination and so a Texas holding might not help very much outside
of Texas. It would be an outer bound of what’s allowed and forbidden.
But before this Supreme Court, DOJ may have calculated it will take what
it can get.
*UPDATE*: Sasha Samberg-Champion writes:
I am formerly of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and a great fan of
your site. I think you are a little off in your tea leaf reading
with respect to the Wisconsin Voter ID case. As a matter of policy,
the SG’s office virtually never files in support of someone else’s
cert petition (as opposed to filing its own petition). That is true
even where the DOJ has weighed in as amicus below. Rather, the SG’s
office will weigh in regarding the cert petition only in response to
a CVSG (call for the views of the SG). My understanding is that
this policy is precisely to avoid this sort of speculation. There
are thousands of cert petitions filed each year and the DOJ does not
want its failure to file in support in any one of them to be read as
having any meaning (nor, for that matter, does it want to be lobbied
incessantly, and have to make a difficult decision, with respect to
each petition). So the “failure” to file in this case is
unsurprising; it would have been surprising for the DOJ to weigh in
before being asked by the Court.
Interesting. Though my sense is that this case is of such importance
that DOJ would have weighed in if the government thought this case was
likely winnable.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71116&title=DOJ%E2%80%99s%20Silence%20on%20the%20Wisconsin%20Voter%20ID%20Case%20Before%20SCOTUS&description=>
Posted inDepartment of Justice
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>,election administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
--
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/20150320/10921d40/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/20150320/10921d40/attachment.png>
View list directory