[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/4/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon May 4 08:10:49 PDT 2015
Racial Gerrymandering’s Questionable Revival”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72218>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 8:09 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72218>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have postedthis draft Essay
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2601459>on SSRN,
forthcoming in the /Alabama Law Review/‘s symposium on the 50th
anniversary of the Voting Rights Act. Here is the abstract:
Like history, the racial gerrymandering cause of action has repeated
itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.
In the 1990s, conservative members of the Supreme Court recognized a
new cause of action, grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal
Protection Clause, of an “unconstitutional racial gerrymander.” The
claim was not one, long recognized, for the intentional dilution of
black votes through the manipulative drawing of district lines.
Instead, it was a shaky, ephemeral claim based solely on
appearances. Racial gerrymandering is an “expressive harm,” aimed at
preventing jurisdictions from sending an impermissible “message” by
separating voters on the basis of race without adequate
justification. In practice, the cause of action helped limit
attempts by the U.S. Department of Justice to force jurisdictions
then covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to create more
majority-minority voting districts which tended to vote Democratic.
Sometimes doing so helped Democrats; at other times the
concentration of reliable Democratic voters helped Republicans.
Within a decade, however, racial gerrymandering claims seemed to
wither away, as the Court used other methods to stop the Department
from reading the Act too broadly.
In 2015, the Supreme Court revived racial gerrymandering claims. In
Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, the four liberals on
the Court and Justice Kennedy agreed with Democrats and minority
voters that the state of Alabama engaged in an unconstitutional
racial gerrymander when it passed a legislative districting plan
which over-concentrated black voters in majority-minority districts
in ostensible compliance with the Voting Rights Act. There was great
irony in the use of the racial gerrymandering cause of action by
minority voters who had rejected it in the 1990s, in its acceptance
by liberal justices, and in the defense of race-based redistricting
by Alabama Republicans and some conservative Supreme Court justices.
While racial gerrymandering has for now become a useful tool for
Democrats and minority plaintiffs to fight certain Republican
gerrymanders, it is no more coherent or justified now than it was
the first time the Court recognized it in the 1990s.
This Essay, written for an Alabama Law Review symposium on the 50th
anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, proceeds in three parts. Part
I briefly describes the emergence of the racial gerrymandering cause
of action in the 1990s and the critiques made of it. Part II briefly
describes the circumstances leading up to the 2015 Alabama case and
Court’s questionable revival of the racial gerrymandering claim.
Part III argues that the racial gerrymandering claim is no more
defensible when used by Democrats or minority voters than by
conservatives or Republicans. No doubt the Alabama legislature used
compliance with the Voting Rights Act as a pretext to pack more
reliable Democratic voters into a smaller number of districts to
help Republicans in the state overall. But that behavior should be
policed as either a form of impermissible racial vote dilution or as
inappropriate partisan behavior. In the end, the Supreme Court has
relied upon the incoherent racial gerrymandering claim because lacks
the right tools to police certain political conduct which might be
impermissibly racist, partisan, or both. Liberal and conservative
scholars have long recognized that the Voting Rights Act’s
enforcement and interpretation can have partisan implications and
motivations. The same is now true for racial gerrymandering claims,
especially given the great overlap of race and party categories in
the South.
This is very much a work in progress. Comments welcome!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72218&title=%E2%80%9CRacial%20Gerrymandering%E2%80%99s%20Questionable%20Revival%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Beyond Quid Pro Quo: What Counts As Political Corruption?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72215>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 8:06 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72215>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Peter Overby
<http://www.npr.org/2015/05/04/404052618/beyond-quid-pro-quo-what-counts-as-political-corruption>for
NPR.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72215&title=%E2%80%9CBeyond%20Quid%20Pro%20Quo%3A%20What%20Counts%20As%20Political%20Corruption%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Ilya Shapiro on Williams-Yulee <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72213>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 8:02 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72213>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/05/symposium-the-judicial-elections-exception-to-the-first-amendment/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72213&title=Ilya%20Shapiro%20on%20Williams-Yulee&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
SCOTUS Justice Testiness on Display in Campaign Finance Cases
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72211>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 8:01 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72211>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Liptak
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/us/justices-opinions-grow-in-size-accessibility-and-testiness-study-finds.html?_r=0>onnew
study
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2554516>highlights
some of the sniping in Williams-Yulee and other campaign finance cases.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72211&title=SCOTUS%20Justice%20Testiness%20on%20Display%20in%20Campaign%20Finance%20Cases&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Bauer on Ravel and FEC Dysfunction <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72209>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 7:58 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72209>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/05/fec-conflicts-choices-chair-responsibility-non-enforcement/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72209&title=Bauer%20on%20Ravel%20and%20FEC%20Dysfunction&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“How Super PACs Will Strengthen Democracy in 2016″
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72207>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 7:57 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72207>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josh Kaushaar
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/against-the-grain/how-super-pacs-will-strengthen-democracy-in-2016-20150503>in
the National Journal.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72207&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Super%20PACs%20Will%20Strengthen%20Democracy%20in%202016%E2%80%B3&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Torres-Spelliscy on Williams-Yulee <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72205>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 7:55 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72205>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here.
<https://www.guernicamag.com/daily/ciara-torres-spelliscy-like-man-bites-dog/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72205&title=Torres-Spelliscy%20on%20Williams-Yulee&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“IRS watchdog finds 6,400 missing Lois Lerner emails”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72203>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 7:53 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72203>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CNN reports.
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/28/politics/irs-watchdog-finds-6400-missing-lois-lerner-emails/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72203&title=%E2%80%9CIRS%20watchdog%20finds%206%2C400%20missing%20Lois%20Lerner%20emails%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
“Media Attorney Floyd Abrams Takes on WaPo’s Dana Milbank over
Campaign Finance Column” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72201>
Posted onMay 4, 2015 7:52 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72201>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mediate.
<http://www.mediaite.com/online/media-attorney-floyd-abrams-takes-on-wapos-dana-milbank-over-campaign-finance-column/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72201&title=%E2%80%9CMedia%20Attorney%20Floyd%20Abrams%20Takes%20on%20WaPo%E2%80%99s%20Dana%20Milbank%20over%20Campaign%20Finance%20Column%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Fact-checking John Boehner’s claim that Americans spend more on
antacids than politics” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72199>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 7:16 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72199>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
False
<http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/fact-checking-john-boehners-claim-that-americans-spend-more-on-antacids/2228124>,
says PunditFact.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72199&title=%E2%80%9CFact-checking%20John%20Boehner%E2%80%99s%20claim%20that%20Americans%20spend%20more%20on%20antacids%20than%20politics%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“The Clintons, a luxury jet and their $100 million donor”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72197>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 5:48 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72197>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Must-read
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-clintons-a-luxury-jet-and-their-100-million-donor/2015/05/03/688051d0-ecef-11e4-8abc-d6aa3bad79dd_story.html>WaPo:
Giustra, 57, a Vancouver, B.C.-based mogul whose eclectic business
interests include founding Lionsgate Entertainment and investing in
gold mines and an olive oil company, has come to symbolize a
relatively new but substantial category of Clinton backers: foreign
donors who are not legally eligible to contribute to U.S. political
candidates but grew close to the Clintons through the charity….
Last week, the Clinton Foundation acknowledged that an affiliated
Canadian charity founded in 2007 by Giustra kept its donors secret,
despite a 2008 ethics agreement with the Obama administration
promising to reveal the New York-based foundation’s donors.
The foundation said the arrangement conformed with Canadian law. But
it also opened a way for anonymous donors, including foreign
executives with business pending before the Hillary Clinton-led
State Department, to direct money to the Clinton Foundation.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72197&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Clintons%2C%20a%20luxury%20jet%20and%20their%20%24100%20million%20donor%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,conflict of
interest laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>
OK All You Foreign Emoluments Clause Junkies (I Know You Are Out
There) <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72194>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 5:41 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72194>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Zephyr connects the dots
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/03/the-clintons-snuff-box-problem.html?via=mobile&source=twitter>from
Ben Franklin to the Clintons.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72194&title=OK%20All%20You%20Foreign%20Emoluments%20Clause%20Junkies%20%28I%20Know%20You%20Are%20Out%20There%29&description=>
Posted inconflict of interest laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>
“Can Democrats Walk a Tricky, Squiggly Red Line?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72191>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 1:44 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72191>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Emily
Cadei<http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/can-democrats-walk-a-tricky-squiggly-red-line/ar-BBiLkof>on
North Carolina districting after the Alabama case.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72191&title=%E2%80%9CCan%20Democrats%20Walk%20a%20Tricky%2C%20Squiggly%20Red%20Line%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Voting Rights
Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Christie Casualty of Plutocrat Primary
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72189>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 7:24 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72189>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Telling line
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/politics/Christies-Camp-Mobilizes-to-Salvage-White-House-Hopes.html>from
NYT prebituary: “Mr. Christie’s campaign aides have declined to say how
much money he has raised so far this year; unlike many of his rivals, he
appears to lack a prominent wealthy donor prepared, at this point, to
sustain a campaign with a multimillion-dollar contribution.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72189&title=Christie%20Casualty%20of%20Plutocrat%20Primary&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>
“F.E.C. Can’t Curb 2016 Election Abuse, Commission Chief Says”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72187>
Posted onMay 3, 2015 7:15 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=72187>byRick
Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Front page NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/politics/fec-cant-curb-2016-election-abuse-commission-chief-says.html>Eric
Lichtblau:
The leader of theFederal Election Commission
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_election_commission/index.html?inline=nyt-org>,
the agency charged with regulating the way political money is raised
and spent, says she has largely given up hope of reining in abuses
in the 2016 presidential campaign, which could generate a record $10
billion in spending.
“The likelihood of the laws being enforced is slim,” Ann M. Ravel,
the chairwoman, said in an interview. “I never want to give up, but
I’m not under any illusions. People think the F.E.C. is
dysfunctional. It’s worse than dysfunctional.”
Her unusually frank assessment reflects a worsening stalemate among
the agency’ssix commissioners
<http://www.fec.gov/members/members.shtml>. They are perpetually
locked in 3-to-3 ties along party lines on key votes because of a
fundamental disagreement over the mandate of the commission, which
was created 40 years ago in response to the political corruption of
Watergate.
Some commissioners are barely on speaking terms, cross-aisle
negotiations are infrequent, and with no consensus on which rules to
enforce, the caseload against violators has plummeted.
The F.E.C.’s paralysis comes at a particularly critical time because
of the sea change brought about by the Supreme Court’s decision in
2010 in the Citizens United case, which freed corporations and
unions to spend unlimited funds in support of political candidates.
Billionaire donors and “super PACs
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>”
are already gaining an outsize role in the 2016 campaign, and the
lines have become increasingly stretched and blurred over what
presidential candidates and political groups are allowed to do.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D72187&title=%E2%80%9CF.E.C.%20Can%E2%80%99t%20Curb%202016%20Election%20Abuse%2C%20Commission%20Chief%20Says%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>,Supreme 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
hhttp://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/20150504/f5e663c5/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/20150504/f5e663c5/attachment.png>
View list directory