[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/26/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Oct 26 07:41:42 PDT 2015
Quote of the Day, Poor Donald Trump Billionaire Edition
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77038>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77038>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/658653111159005184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77038&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day%2C%20Poor%20Donald%20Trump%20Billionaire%20Edition&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“3 Named to Top Posts of Latino Group’s ‘Super PAC’”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77036>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:36 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77036>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/26/3-named-to-top-posts-of-latino-groups-super-pac/?ref=politics>:
A Latino “super PAC,” the Latino Victory Fund, announced three
Democrats as its first co-chairs on Monday — Representative Joaquín
Castro of Texas; Melissa Mark-Viverito, the New York City Council
speaker; and Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles.
The Latino Victory Fund is the super PAC of theLatino Victory
Project <http://www.latinovictory.us/>— a nonpartisan organization
devoted to supporting Latino candidates and increasing turnout of
Latino voters — and it plans to aggressively push back against
candidates, nationally and locally, whose policies it believes will
harm the Latino population.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77036&title=%26%238220%3B3%20Named%20to%20Top%20Posts%20of%20Latino%20Group%E2%80%99s%20%E2%80%98Super%20PAC%E2%80%99%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Carl P. Leubsdorf: Laws seek to curb voting”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77034>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77034>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
/Dallas Morning News /column.
<http://www.kansas.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article41251818.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77034&title=%26%238220%3BCarl%20P.%20Leubsdorf%3A%20Laws%20seek%20to%20curb%20voting%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Super PAC launches ‘Let’s Talk Hillary’ to reveal a softer side of
Clinton” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77032>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:32 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77032>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Delightful.
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/super-pac-launches-lets-talk-hillary-to-reveal-a-softer-side-of-clinton/2015/10/25/3ba216ae-7b3c-11e5-afce-2afd1d3eb896_story.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77032&title=%26%238220%3BSuper%20PAC%20launches%20%E2%80%98Let%E2%80%99s%20Talk%20Hillary%E2%80%99%20to%20reveal%20a%20softer%20side%20of%20Clinton%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“New health overhaul challenge reaching Supreme Court”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77030>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:30 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77030>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mark Sherman of AP
<http://new%20health%20overhaul%20challenge%20reaching%20supreme%20court/>on
the Origination Clause challenge to Obamacare. Here is
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75125>my earlier analysis of the chances
of cert. in this case:
I could see this interesting Justice Scalia (whose alternative view
of the origination clause gets play by Judge Kavanaugh), Justice
Thomas, and potentially Justice Alito. Do they get a fourth vote for
cert. from CJ Roberts or Justice Kennedy, and would they care
whether they’d be likely to get both of them on the merits in a
final ruling? This is unclear, as is it unclear how strategically
these Justices will vote on the cert. decision.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77030&title=%26%238220%3BNew%20health%20overhaul%20challenge%20reaching%20Supreme%20Court%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Bush super PAC considering staff for early voting states”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77028>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:28 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77028>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
But of course.
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b064747c6f0648abb7a1837899fb98a4/bush-super-pac-considering-staff-early-voting-states>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77028&title=%26%238220%3BBush%20super%20PAC%20considering%20staff%20for%20early%20voting%20states%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Paul Ryan Says Corporate Lobbyist Would Be Chief Of Staff If He
Becomes House Speaker” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77026>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:27 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77026>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Shocker.
<http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/paul-ryan-says-corporate-lobbyist-would-be-chief-staff-if-he-becomes-house-speaker>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77026&title=%26%238220%3BPaul%20Ryan%20Says%20Corporate%20Lobbyist%20Would%20Be%20Chief%20Of%20Staff%20If%20He%20Becomes%20House%20Speaker%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“GOP moneymen: Ryan a fundraising juggernaut; His cash network will
more than compensate for weekends at home, allies say. “
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77024>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:26 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77024>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/paul-ryan-fundraising-house-speaker-215116#ixzz3pfiMeCwZ>:
But party officials are already plotting creative ways to compensate
for Ryan’s demand for family time. Boehner held a lot of fundraisers
on the golf course. Ryan isn’t a golfer. So instead of a five-hour
event playing golf, allies say, Ryan can hold two events in the same
time and can bring in five times as much money by attracting many
more donors. Associates also say he is unusually efficient with his
time, even tending to donors on drives between events.
As Ryan nears the speakership, his political operation is beginning
to take shape.
As Ways and Means chairman, Ryan had dual agreements with the NRCC
and Republican National Committee, whereby he gave each greoup a day
or two during congressional recesses in which they could send him
around the country for events. Ryan has told the RNC that he will no
longer do regular events for it, and instead will focus solely on
the NRCC.
During a private meeting during which he announced his candidacy,
Ryan also told the House Republican Conference that he would focus
solely on raising money for the NRCC.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77024&title=%26%238220%3BGOP%20moneymen%3A%20Ryan%20a%20fundraising%20juggernaut%3B%20His%20cash%20network%20will%20more%20than%20compensate%20for%20weekends%20at%20home%2C%20allies%20say.%20%26%238220%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Sacramento County elections chief tied to group chosen to review
her office” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77021>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77021>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Hmmmm.
<http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/the-public-eye/article41330568.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77021&title=%26%238220%3BSacramento%20County%20elections%20chief%20tied%20to%20group%20chosen%20to%20review%20her%20office%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Which kinds of campaign donations lead to more polarized
legislatures? You’ll be surprised by the answer.”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77019>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77019>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Michael Barber
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/10/23/which-kinds-of-campaign-donations-lead-to-more-polarized-legislatures-youll-be-surprised-by-the-answer/>at
the Monkey Cage:
As I discovered in mynew research
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/683453>, forthcoming at
theJournal of Politics <http://www.jstor.org/journal/jpolitics>,
lower contribution limits can lead either to more moderate
legislatures or to more polarized legislatures. It all depends on
what type of money is limited.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77019&title=%26%238220%3BWhich%20kinds%20of%20campaign%20donations%20lead%20to%20more%20polarized%20legislatures%3F%20You%E2%80%99ll%20be%20surprised%20by%20the%20answer.%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Progressive activists attempt to silence the business community”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77017>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77017>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brad Smith and Scott Blackburn in theWash. Examiner.
<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/progressive-activists-attempt-to-silence-the-business-community/article/2574757>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77017&title=%26%238220%3BProgressive%20activists%20attempt%20to%20silence%20the%20business%20community%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Clinton White House sleepover guests still writing checks; Friends
who slept in Lincoln bedroom shift donations from Bill to Hillary”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77015>
Posted onOctober 26, 2015 7:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77015>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CPI reports.
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/10/26/18668/clinton-white-house-sleepover-guests-still-writing-checks?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=watchdog&utm_medium=publici-email&goal=0_ffd1d0160d-151f8df238-100055017&mc_cid=151f8df238&mc_eid=5427f0b24a>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77015&title=%26%238220%3BClinton%20White%20House%20sleepover%20guests%20still%20writing%20checks%3B%20Friends%20who%20slept%20in%20Lincoln%20bedroom%20shift%20donations%20from%20Bill%20to%20Hillary%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
Does the Right Remain More Energized Than the Left About Upcoming
#SCOTUS Vacancies? If So, Why? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77013>
Posted onOctober 25, 2015 1:33 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77013>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
In thislong read f
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/supreme-court-greatest-civil-rights-cause>rom
me at TPM, I argued:
The future composition of the Supreme Court is the most important
civil rights cause of our time. It is more important than racial
justice, marriage equality, voting rights, money in politics,
abortion rights, gun rights, or managing climate change. It matters
more because the ability to move forward in these other civil rights
struggles depends first and foremost upon control of the Court. And
control for the next generation is about to be up for grabs, likely
in the next presidential election, a point many on the right but few
on the left seem to have recognized.
I got a fair amount of pushback from those on the left saying that the
issue is very much on the agenda, but that’s not my sense.
Here’sRichard
Wolf<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/10/25/supreme-court-president-age-80-election/74003698/>at
USA Today:
In recent years and during the current presidential primary
campaigns, Republicans and conservatives act as if they have the
most at stake, while Democrats and liberals appear more sanguine —
even though the court remains largely conservative. There are
several reasons…
And here’s Senator (and presidential candidate)Ted Cruz
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/257997-cruz-america-one-more-liberal-justice-away-from-irrevocable>:
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) says the U.S. of today will become
unrecognizable if “one more liberal justice” is appointed to the
Supreme Court.
“One more liberal justice and our right to keep and bear arms is
taken away from us by an activist court,” Cruz said at a campaign
rally in Iowa on Friday, according to the Des Moines Register.
“One more liberal justice and they begin sandblasting and bulldozing
veterans memorials throughout this country,” he added.
“One more liberal justice and we lose our sovereignty to the United
Nations and the World Court.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77013&title=Does%20the%20Right%20Remain%20More%20Energized%20Than%20the%20Left%20About%20Upcoming%20%23SCOTUS%20Vacancies%3F%20If%20So%2C%20Why%3F&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Judicial Engagement or Judicial Tyranny?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77011>
Posted onOctober 25, 2015 9:57 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77011>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Eric Segall:
<http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2015/10/judicial-engagement-or-judicial-tyranny.html>
Last Thursday, George Will wrote yet anotherop-ed
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/23/ed-whelan-vs-george-will-on-judicial-restraint/?postshare=4681445602975922>advocating
that non-elected, life tenured judges play a stronger role in
protecting individual liberty (read that as economic liberty), and
that this issue should be used by the GOP both in the next
presidential campaign and to appoint the next Supreme Court Justice.
This argument, against the judicial restraint philosophy advocated
by Robert Bork and Ed Meese circa 1980, has been given deep
scholarly meaning by Professors Richard Epstein of NYU and Professor
Randy Barnett of Georgetown, two of this country’s most intelligent
and deep-thinking legal academics. Both of these men have written
scores of articles and books arguing that our Constitution, properly
understood, as well as society’s current best interests, lie in
judges strongly enforcing a libertarian conception of government
power where minimum wage laws, union protections, and even
non-discrimination laws are inherently suspect. They have been
joined by right-wing think tanks like the Cato Institute and the
Heritage Foundation as well as by top notch litigators like Clark
Neilly, whose book “Judicial Engagement” is a call to arms for
judges to seriously question much economic legislation. In addition,
Evan Bernick haswritten
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bernick/lochner-lives-why-conserv_b_7130820.html>thoughtfully
in favor of strong judicial engagement at the Huffington Post.
Against all of this is nary a word from liberal academics and
pundits, though old-guard conservative Ed Whelan is trying hard to
block this call for aggressive judicial review byreminding
<http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/426002/re-george-wills-mistaken-critique-judicial-restraint-ed-whelan?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter>folks
about the dangers of allocating more power to government officials
we do not elect and cannot vote out of office.
The history of strong judicial review of economic legislation is not
a pretty one. Starting in the early 1900’s the Court began striking
down laws relating to mild progressive efforts to protect workers,
wages, and unions. Over 200 such laws were struck down by the
Supreme Court from 1900-1936, and of course many more by lower court
judges. This torrent of strong judicial review ended with the New
Deal, FDR’s Court-packing plan, and the realization by most
academics that the line between pure rent seeking and monopolistic
efforts, on the one hand, and legitimate government regulation, on
the other, is too fine to be trusted to lawyers and judges. As
Holmes said in the first few lines of his famousdissent
<https://legallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2006/01/26/holmes-dissent-in-lochner-v-new-york/>in
the/Lochner/decision overturning a maximum-hour law for New York
bakers: “This case is decided upon an economic theory which a large
part of the country does not entertain. If it were a question
whether I agreed with that theory, I should desire to study it
further and long before making up my mind. But I do not conceive
that to be my duty, because I strongly believe that my agreement or
disagreement has nothing to do with the right of a majority to
embody their opinions in law.”
Justice Holmes’ answer to his brethren in/Lochner/is persuasive and
underlies where Whelan, federal judge Harvey Wilkinson, and
progressive liberals like Mark Tushnet and yours truly all center
our arguments. Whereas Randy Barnett and Richard Epstein believe
passionately and sincerely that we would all be better off with
strong judicial protection of economic rights, I think our society
would be much worse without egalitarian protections for the poor and
for workers everywhere. Moreover, I think reproductive freedom is
perhaps our most important personal right, given both the bodily
integrity interests involved and the dramatic social and economic
consequences of unplanned pregnancies. Who is right and who is
wrong? I say let the voters decide whereas Barnett and Epstein want
judges to strongly enforce their vision of the right and the good.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77011&title=%26%238220%3BJudicial%20Engagement%20or%20Judicial%20Tyranny%3F%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“More in the dark than ever” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77009>
Posted onOctober 25, 2015 9:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77009>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/more-in-the-dark-than-ever-b99601267z1-336439371.html>:
“The politicians who have the most to gain will love this bill. But if
the legislation is signed into law, as is expected, Wisconsin’s voters
will be more in the dark than ever about who is trying to influence
their government.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D77009&title=%26%238220%3BMore%20in%20the%20dark%20than%20ever%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
--
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/20151026/9d85bdc7/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/20151026/9d85bdc7/attachment.png>
View list directory