[EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/7/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Sep 7 09:43:45 PDT 2015
“Redistricting challengers used data and emails to piece together
signs of conspiracy” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75868>
Posted onSeptember 7, 2015 9:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75868>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Tampa Bay Times
<http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/redistricting-challengers-used-data-and-emails-to-piece-together-signs-of/2244370>:
The legal team that uncovered the shadow redistricting process that
invalidated Florida’s congressional and Senate districts didn’t rely
just on maps and cloak-and-dagger emails to prove that legislators
broke the law.
The best clues came in the form of data — millions of census blocks
— delivered electronically and found in the files of political
operatives who fought for two years to shield it.
The Florida Supreme Court ruled 5-2 in July that lawmakers were
guilty of violating the anti-gerrymandering provisions of the
Florida Constitution and ordered them to redraw the congressional map.
It was a landmark ruling that declared the entire process had been
“tainted with improper political intent” — a verdict so broad that
it prompted an admission from the state Senate that lawmakers had
violated the Constitution when they drew the Senate redistricting
plan in 2012. The Legislature has scheduled a special session in
October to start over on that map.
But the breakthrough for the legal team — lawyers for the League of
Women Voters, Common Cause, a coalition of Democrat-leaning voters
and their redistricting experts — came just days before the May 19,
2014 trial on the congressional map was set to begin.
After two years of legal challenges, Florida justices ruled that
emails, maps and accompanying data produced by political consultants
and related to redistricting must be produced and could be discussed
at trial. The challengers had already learned that the Legislature’s
maps selectively shed and added populations to congressional
districts to improve the performance for incumbent candidates, but
they had only circumstantial evidence that the maps found on the
computers of the political consultants played a role.
Using a matrix that reviewed 400,000 precincts covering 27 districts
in each map, the lawyers and their experts “were able to trace the
evolution of the maps and figure it out,” said David King, of
Orlando-based King, Blackwell, Zehnder and Wermuth, the lead lawyer
for the League of Women Voters and Common Cause.
More at the Miami Herald
<http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article34169631.html#storylink=cpy>($)
on the work of Dan Smith and others.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75868&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20challengers%20used%20data%20and%20emails%20to%20piece%20together%20signs%20of%20conspiracy%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,redistricting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
“Food Industry Enlisted Academics in G.M.O. Lobbying War, Emails
Show” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75866>
Posted onSeptember 7, 2015 9:26 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75866>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/us/food-industry-enlisted-academics-in-gmo-lobbying-war-emails-show.html?_r=0>:
Corporations have poured money into universities to fund research
for decades, but now, the debate overbioengineered foods
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/g/genetically_modified_food/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>has
escalated into a billion-dollar food industry war. Companies like
Monsanto are squaring off against major organic firms like
Stonyfield Farm, the yogurt company, and both sides have
aggressively recruited academic researchers, emails obtained through
open records laws show.
The emails provide a rare view into the strategy and tactics of a
lobbying campaign that has transformed ivory tower elites into
powerful players. The use by both sides of third-party scientists,
and their supposedly unbiased research, helps explain why the
American public is often confused as it processes the conflicting
information.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75866&title=%E2%80%9CFood%20Industry%20Enlisted%20Academics%20in%20G.M.O.%20Lobbying%20War%2C%20Emails%20Show%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
@Lessig’s Running, Raised His Million
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75864>
Posted onSeptember 7, 2015 9:23 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75864>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Tweet <https://twitter.com/lessig/status/640515609466310657>
Politico
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/lawrence-lessig-2016-presidential-run-213376>
9 Things to Know About Lawrence Lessig
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/09/06/17956/9-things-know-about-lawrence-lessig>
And from last week, my ELB Podcast interview with Lessig, ELB Podcast
Episode 3: Larry Lessig: Bold Campaign Reformer or Don Quixote?
<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=75706>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75864&title=%40Lessig%E2%80%99s%20Running%2C%20Raised%20His%20Million&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Presidential Fundraising: New CFI Table Arrays the Sources of
Candidates’ Early Money” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75862>
Posted onSeptember 7, 2015 9:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75862>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Campaign Finance Institute
<http://www.cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/15-08-24/Presidential_Fundraising_New_CFI_Table_Arrays_the_Sources_of_Candidates%E2%80%99_Early_Money.aspx>:
We know by now that the presidential campaigns raised early money
from mega-donors at an unprecedented clip, with most of the money
during the first half of 2015 going into legally independent Super
PACs. The Campaign Finance Institute today released a table
<http://www.cfinst.org/pdf/federal/president/2016/Pres16_SuperPAC-Campaign_Donors_June30.pdf> that
makes it easier to quantify what has been happening. In the table
<http://www.cfinst.org/pdf/federal/president/2016/Pres16_SuperPAC-Campaign_Donors_June30.pdf>,
candidates and Super PAC receipts are combined, as are each donor’s
contributions across the committees.
From the table
<http://www.cfinst.org/pdf/federal/president/2016/Pres16_SuperPAC-Campaign_Donors_June30.pdf>,
we can see (in the lower right corner) that only 56 donors
(individuals and organizations) gave $1 million or more, but they
were responsible for 31% of all of the money. More than half of the
money came from 474 donors who gave $100,000 or more.
Four candidates and their Super PACs received more than half of
their money from million dollar donors: Ted Cruz (71%), Scott
Walker1 (63%), Mike Huckabee (54%), and Marco Rubio (51%). Donald
Trump’s campaign has been mostly self-financed.
Boosted by a strong second quarter of fundraising through her
campaign committee, Hillary Clinton’s support was weighted toward
traditional campaign donors who max out at $2,700 for the primary.
Donors to her campaign committee accounted for over 70% of her
combined total.
At the small donor end of the spectrum, Bernie Sanders, received 77%
of his money from donors who gave $200 or less. Ben Carson received
65%. Super PACs supporting Carson were unique among all Super PACs
in that the $3.4 million raised from donors who gave $200 or less
was nearly eight times what all other Super PACs combined raised
from small donors.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75862&title=%E2%80%9CPresidential%20Fundraising%3A%20New%20CFI%20Table%20Arrays%20the%20Sources%20of%20Candidates%E2%80%99%20Early%20Money%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Inside the battle to overhaul overtime — and what it says about how
lobbying has changed” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75860>
Posted onSeptember 7, 2015 9:12 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75860>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/09/04/inside-the-battle-to-overhaul-overtime-and-what-it-tells-us-about-how-lobbying-works-now/>:
The week before Labor Day may be a quiet one in Washington. But in
the nation’s capital and across the country, legions of lawyers and
lobbyists are scrambling to weigh in one of the most consequential
regulations of Obama’s second term: Anupdate
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/30/obama-goes-big-with-changes-to-overtime-policy/>to
the Fair Labor Standards Act that would make 4.6 million more people
eligible for overtime.
Thecomment period
<http://www.regulations.gov/#%21docketDetail;D=WHD-2015-0001>ends
Friday on therule
<http://www.regulations.gov/#%21documentDetail;D=WHD-2015-0001-0001>, and
the outcome could have more of a direct impact on Americans’
earnings as almost any federal law that’s passed since the
Affordable Care Act. That’s no accident: As the Obama Administration
has resorted to executive action as an end run around a gridlocked
and hostile Congress, lobbyists haveturned their attention
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/lobbyists-shift-strategy-amid-gridlocked-congress/2013/10/23/31701066-3c0d-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html>to
the more complex and obscure world of cabinet agencies, because
rule-making and regulation is where today’s policy-making wars are
fought.
Of course, it’s a different kind of warfare. Unlike the legislative
process, where lobbying and dealmaking are more accepted, rulemaking
is supposed to rest on an agency’s discretion, guided by technical
analyses of economic impacts. Nevertheless, they’re stills
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2013/features/he_who_makes_the_rules043315.php?page=all>ubject
to outside influence
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2013/features/he_who_makes_the_rules043315.php?page=all>—
and on the most important rules, interested parties on all sides try
their darndest to have an impact.
At the same time, Internet-based transparency measures have made
itever-easier for the general population
<https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/4709-nashwalters-ppr-researchpaper062015pdf>to
pick over proposals and tell regulators what they think. As a
result, what used to be relatively insular, back-room affairs have
become pitched public battles, generating mountains of input. In a
few cases, at least.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75860&title=%E2%80%9CInside%20the%20battle%20to%20overhaul%20overtime%20%E2%80%94%20and%20what%20it%20says%20about%20how%20lobbying%20has%20changed%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
Sunstein Criticizes Lessig and Warren on Whether the System is
“Rigged” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75858>
Posted onSeptember 4, 2015 5:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75858>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Cass Sunstein:
<http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20150826-cass-r.-sunstein-no-democrats-the-american-system-isnt-rigged.ece>
It is unquestionably true that money often distorts political
outcomes, because it plays an intolerably large role in the
political system. Warren, Sanders and Lessig are right to emphasize
that moneyed interests sometimes block desirable action. As Nobel
Prize-winning economists George Akerlof and Robert Shiller explain
in a forthcoming book, those interests have especially harmful
effects on complex or technical issues to which ordinary voters pay
little attention.
It is one thing to deplore the effects of money and well-organized
private interests. It is quite another to proclaim that our
democratic structures are rigged.
The current era of fundamental reform demonstrates that if
yesterday’s losers work hard enough, they can end up as tomorrow’s
winners. The system is far from perfect, but it is anything but rigged.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75858&title=Sunstein%20Criticizes%20Lessig%20and%20Warren%20on%20Whether%20the%20System%20is%20%E2%80%9CRigged%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,political
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,political polarization
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>
“Florida Supreme Court allows for another redistricting session, but
orders trial court to take charge” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75856>
Posted onSeptember 4, 2015 5:45 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75856>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Miami Herald
<http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article34049748.html>:
The Florida Supreme Court on Friday ordered the trial court to
return to the redistricting drawing board, allowing it to review the
rival maps submitted by the House and Senate and choose between them.
The court rejected a request by the plaintiffs to take over the
drawing of the congressional map after a two-week special session of
the Legislature in August ended without an enacted map.
But the high court opened the door to the state Senate’s request to
conduct another special session on redistricting, as long as the
work is completed by the deadline the court set in July — Oct. 17.
The ruling orders Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis to hold a hearing
on the “proposed remedial plans” from both the House and the Senate,
as well as any amendments offered to them.
“However, the Legislature is not precluded from enacting a remedial
plan prior to the time the trial court sets for the hearing,” the
court added
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75856&title=%E2%80%9CFlorida%20Supreme%20Court%20allows%20for%20another%20redistricting%20session%2C%20but%20orders%20trial%20court%20to%20take%20charge%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
“Voter ID Battle: Texas Seeks Rehearing, DOJ Seeks Injunction”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75854>
Posted onSeptember 4, 2015 5:38 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75854>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Texas Lawyer:
<http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202736489629/Voter-ID-Battle-Texas-Seeks-Rehearing-DOJ-Seeks-Injunction?slreturn=20150804201412>
Texas has asked the full bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit to rehear civil rights plaintiffs’ case against the
state’s voter ID law after a three-judge panel from the same court
ruled that the law discriminates.
Because the state’s request for a rehearing is pending, and since
Texas may also seek a hearing at the U.S. Supreme Court, the Fifth
Circuit in a Sept. 2 order rejected civil rights plaintiffs’
proposals to have the litigation remanded to the trial court, where
a judge could have ordered Texas to immediately start changing how
it identifies voters.
“We will get those decisions pretty quickly,” Rolando Rios, of San
Antonio’s Law Office of Rolando L. Rios, said about the rulings on
the en banc Fifth Circuit and Supreme Court hearings. Rios
represents the Texas Association of Hispanic County Judges and
County Commissioners, which is an intervening plaintiff in the
litigation.
But the U.S. Department of Justice, which has sided with the civil
rights plaintiffs in the litigation, wants to avoid any wait for
Texas to redo its voter ID procedures. To that end, the DOJ also
filed on Sept. 2 a motion requesting that the Fifth Circuit enter an
injunction directing Texas to accept as sufficient valid voter
registration certificates from voters who lack the specific list of
documentation required under the law SB-14, which the Fifth
Circuit’s three-judge panel struck down. Passed in 2011, SB-14
requires voters to show specific government-issued photo
identifications. Among the identifications the law allows voters to
show: driver’s licenses, concealed handgun licenses, U.S. military
identifications, U.S. passports or other U.S. citizenship certificates.
I don’t see how this gets resolved “pretty quickly,” especially given
the time to file a cert. petition if en banc review is denied.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75854&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20ID%20Battle%3A%20Texas%20Seeks%20Rehearing%2C%20DOJ%20Seeks%20Injunction%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting
Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Talk in G.O.P. Turns to a Stop Donald Trump Campaign”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75852>
Posted onSeptember 4, 2015 5:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75852>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/05/us/politics/talk-in-gop-turns-to-a-stop-donald-trump-campaign.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0>:
But the mammoth big-money network assembled by Republicans in recent
years is torn about how best to defuse the threat Mr. Trump holds
for their party, and haunted by the worry that any concerted attack
will backfire.
In phone calls, private dinners and occasional consultations among
otherwise rivalrous outside groups, many have concluded that Mr.
Trump’s harsh manner and continued attacks on immigrants and women
were endangering the party’s efforts to compete in the general
election. Yet after committing hundreds of millions of dollars to
shape the Republican primary contest and groom a candidate who can
retake the White House, the conservative donor class is finding that
money — even in an era ofsuper PACs
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>and
billion-dollar presidential campaigns — is a devalued currency in
the blustery, post-policy campaign fashioned by Mr. Trump, driven
not by seven-figure advertising campaigns but by Twitter feuds and
unending free publicity.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75852&title=%E2%80%9CTalk%20in%20G.O.P.%20Turns%20to%20a%20Stop%20Donald%20Trump%20Campaign%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Hundreds rally in Raleigh for voting rights”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75849>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 11:04 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75849>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WRAL
<http://www.wral.com/hundreds-rally-in-raleigh-for-voting-rights/14874730/>:
Hundreds of people marched through downtown Raleigh on Thursday
evening and rallied near the State Capitol in support of voting rights.
The demonstration is part of the NAACP’s Journey for Justice march,
which began Aug. 1 in Selma, Ala., and is expected to conclude later
this month with a rally in Washington, D.C. The 860-mile trek has
focused on issues from improving schools to economic growth to
criminal justice reform, but in North Carolina, it has centered on
voting rights.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75849&title=%E2%80%9CHundreds%20rally%20in%20Raleigh%20for%20voting%20rights%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Ethics probe finds California Rep. Honda may have mixed official
and campaign business” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75846>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 11:02 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75846>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/09/03/ethics-probe-finds-california-rep-honda-may-have-mixed-official-and-campaign-business/>:
A congressional ethics panel announced Thursday that Rep. Mike Honda
(D-Calif.) may have improperly used tax-payer funded congressional
staff and resources for campaign activity in 2012 and 2014.
A report from the Office of Congressional Ethics
<http://ethics.house.gov/sites/ethics.house.gov/files/Rep.%20Honda%20OCE%20Report%20and%20Findings.pdf>(OCE)
found that there “there is substantial reason to believe” that
staffers assigned to Honda’s House office were involved in work that
benefited his campaign. The OCE is an independent body that
investigates ethics allegations and refers issues to the House
Ethics Committee for further review. TheEthics Committee plans
<https://ethics.house.gov/press-release/statement-chairman-and-ranking-member-committee-ethics-regarding-representative-14>to
extend its probe into Honda’s behavior.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75846&title=%E2%80%9CEthics%20probe%20finds%20California%20Rep.%20Honda%20may%20have%20mixed%20official%20and%20campaign%20business%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,conflict
of interest laws <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=20>,ethics
investigations <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=42>
“Anti-Citizens United initiative case to be argued in October”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75844>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 10:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75844>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
At the Lectern:
<http://www.atthelectern.com/anti-citizens-united-initiative-case-to-be-argued-in-october/>
/Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Padilla/
<http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2083887&doc_no=S220289>—
the case to decide whether the Legislature can ask the voters to
give their advisory opinion whether the United States Constitution
should be amended to overturn the United States Supreme
Court’s/Citizens United/opinion — will be argued before the
California Supreme Court next month. The Legislature had placed on
the 2014 ballot an initiative requesting that opinion, but, with
election deadlines imminent, the Supreme Courtremoved it
<http://www.atthelectern.com/could-prop-49-be-prop-140-redux/>,
saying the proposition’s validity wasuncertain
<http://www.horvitzlevy.com/extranet/XNet/case_27/filing2476.pdf>and
holding out the possibility of the initiative appearing on a future
ballot if the court ultimately determines it is valid. Now, after
full briefing, the court is set — one way or the other — to remove
the uncertainty about the validity.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75844&title=%E2%80%9CAnti-Citizens%20United%20initiative%20case%20to%20be%20argued%20in%20October%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“With flourish, Trump rejects independent bid if he loses GOP
nomination” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75841>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 6:26 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75841>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
LAT <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-gop-trump-20150903-story.html>:
Election lawyers say the pledge is not legally binding because it
does not promise the parties anything in return for their loyalty.
“As a matter of contract law, it doesn’t look like an enforceable
contract,” said UC Irvine law professor Richard Hasen, who
specializes in election law.
“To be a binding contract, they have to be giving something, and
what could they give?” Hasen asked.
Trump told reporters he received “absolutely nothing, other than the
assurance that I would be treated fairly” in return for his
signature, a statement that might leave some room for later
interpretation. Asked whether he would change his mind, he said,
“No, I have no intention of changing my mind.”
The party appears to be simply banking on candidates’ unwillingness
to break a promise, Hasen noted.
“If [Trump] later changed his mind, he would be painted as a
hypocrite for promising one thing and doing something else,” Hasen said.
Michael Kang, a professor at Emory University in Atlanta who has
written about election laws, called the pledge “an attempt to
replicate the effect” of so-called sore-loser laws. Such laws
stipulate that a registered primary candidate cannot switch parties
or become an independent to run in a general election, though states
rarely apply them to presidential candidates, Kang and Hasen said.
Kang called the enforcement of such a pledge an “open question.”
“It’s safe to say that there would be constitutional questions about
their enforceability,” Kang said.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75841&title=%E2%80%9CWith%20flourish%2C%20Trump%20rejects%20independent%20bid%20if%20he%20loses%20GOP%20nomination%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Irregular Blogging the Next Few Weeks
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75839>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 5:01 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75839>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’m on my way to #APSA, and between APSA and my talk at Ohio State in
early October, I have a number of speaking engagements, internal and
external administrative and scholarly deadlines, and family obligations.
So expect blogging to be more irregular (I’d say erratic, but my
blogging is always erratic). Those who get my posts via the Election
Law listserv may not receive posts every day.
Thanks for your patience.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75839&title=Irregular%20Blogging%20the%20Next%20Few%20Weeks&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Major Benchslap to Nevada Federal District Court Judge Robert Jones
by 9th Circuit <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75837>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 4:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75837>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
In the NVRA case I justmentioned <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75835>,
the Ninth Circuit took the rare step of reassigning a case away from
federal district court Robert Jones. (This isnot the first smackdown
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=44900>of Judge Jones by the Ninth
Circuit). Here’s the discussion fromtoday’s opinion
<http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/imce/nv_opinion_1_%20%281%29.pdf>:
D. Reassignment
Plaintiffs have asked, in the event we reverse and remand, that we
assign this case to a different district judge. We reassign only in
“‘rare and extraordinary circumstances,’” Krechman v. Cnty. of
Riverside, 723 F.3d 1104, 1112 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting United Nat’l
Ins. Co. v. R&D Latex Corp., 242 F.3d 1102, 1118 (9th Cir. 2001)),
such as when the district court “has exhibited personal bias,” In re
Ellis, 356 F.3d 1198, 1211 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (quoting United
Nat’l Ins. Co., 242 F.3d at 1118), or when “reassignment is
advisable to maintain the appearance of justice.” United States v.
Kyle, 734 F.3d 956, 966–67 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting United States v.
Lyons, 472 F.3d 1055, 1071 (9th Cir. 2006)). We reluctantly conclude
that we must reassign this case. The errors made by the district
judge may suggest to a reasonable outside observer that reassignment
“to maintain the appearance of justice” is necessary. The reasons
for our conclusion are apparent from what we have written above, and
we review them only briefly here. The judge sua sponte sought to
limit the effectiveness of representation by insisting unreasonably
that only two of Plaintiffs’ chosen out-of-state attorneys be given
pro hac vice status. See In re United States, No. 14-70486, 2015 WL
3938190, at *8 (9th Cir. June 29, 2015) (“At minimum, a court’s
decision to deny pro hac vice admission must be based on criteria
reasonably related to promoting the orderly administration of
justice, or some other legitimate policy of the courts.” (citations
omitted)). The judge did this despite the plea of Plaintiffs’ Nevada
lawyer that he needed the expert assistance of out-of-state counsel
who specialize in NVRA litigation, and over the objection of one of
the would-be out-of-state counsel that the judge’s ruling would
prevent depositions from being taken in Nevada by associates in his
firm. The judge’s actions came very shortly after the Ninth Circuit
had deemed “troubling” his comments regarding out-of-state counsel
in another case involving a different Nevada agency. Henry A. v.
Wilden, 678 F.3d 991, 1012 (9th Cir. 2012). Based on this and other
cases, a reasonable observer could conclude that the judge’s
feelings against out-of-state attorneys are both wellestablished and
inappropriately strong. See Great Basin Res. Watch v. United States
Dep’t of the Interior, No. 3:13-CV- 00078-RCJ, 2014 WL3697107, at *3
(D. Nev. July 23, 2014) (this same judge expressly stated he would
“presume[] that the out-of-state lawyers are unwilling to obey the
ethical strictures that govern all other attorneys”). Further, the
judge sua sponte and without notice dismissed Plaintiffs’ case based
on a motion the State had previously withdrawn, pursuant to a joint
stipulation by the parties. Still further, the judge misread the
complaint when he concluded that Plaintiffs had failed to allege
that they had changed their behavior and had thus suffered no
injury, when Plaintiffs had alleged that they had expended
additional resources on voter registration as a result of the
State’s violation of Section 7. Finally, the judge dismissed the
complaint without leave to amend despite Plaintiffs’ explicit
request that they be allowed to amend their complaint if the judge
found its allegations insufficient.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75837&title=Major%20Benchslap%20to%20Nevada%20Federal%20District%20Court%20Judge%20Robert%20Jones%20by%209th%20Circuit&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Ninth Circuit Hands Victory to Voting Rights Groups in Public
Assistance Voter Registration Case”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75835>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 4:53 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75835>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This is abig deal
<http://www.demos.org/press-release/ninth-circuit-hands-victory-voting-rights-groups-public-assistance-voter-registration->:
Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
issueda decision
<http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/imce/nv_opinion_1_%20%281%29.pdf>reinstating
a case challenging the State of Nevada’s failure to provide
federally required voter registration services to its low-income
citizens. The case, brought by the National Council of La Raza, the
NAACP Reno/Sparks Branch, and NAACP Las Vegas, had been thrown out
by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
Voting rights groups Demos, Project Vote, and the Lawyers’ Committee
for Civil Rights Under Law, which represented the plaintiffs along
with the law firms Dechert LLP and Woodburn and Wedge, applauded the
decision.
“Today’s decision is a victory for low-income voters in Nevada and
the community groups that serve them,” said Brenda Wright, Vice
President for Legal Strategies at Demos. “The Ninth Circuit’s
decision recognizes the fundamental importance of access to the
courts in protecting the right to vote. We are pleased that the
Ninth Circuit has rectified a miscarriage of justice by reinstating
our clients’ voting rights claims.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75835&title=%E2%80%9CNinth%20Circuit%20Hands%20Victory%20to%20Voting%20Rights%20Groups%20in%20Public%20Assistance%20Voter%20Registration%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,NVRA (motor voter)
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>
“Bloomberg Law Brief: Voting Booth Selfies”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75833>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 1:01 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75833>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
(Bloomberg) — Richard Hasen, Professor of Law and Politics at University
of California – Irvine, and Timothy Zick, Professor of Law at William &
Mary, discuss whether a law that bans taking selfies in the voting booth
is unconstitutional. They speak with Michael Best and June Grasso on the
“Bloomberg Law” show.
Listen <http://media.bloomberg.com/bb/avfile/vipzfh1JnYFQ.mp3>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75833&title=%E2%80%9CBloomberg%20Law%20Brief%3A%20Voting%20Booth%20Selfies%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
“Emails show how Clinton fundraiser-turned-lobbyist used connections
for clients” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75831>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 1:01 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75831>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Open Secrets reports.
<https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/09/emails-show-how-clinton-fundraiser-turned-lobbyist-used-connections-for-clients/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75831&title=%E2%80%9CEmails%20show%20how%20Clinton%20fundraiser-turned-lobbyist%20used%20connections%20for%20clients%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,lobbying
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
“Donald Trump signs pledge not to run as independent”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75829>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 12:40 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75829>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
But it’slikely
<http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/03/donald-trump-pledge-independent-president>unenforceable.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75829&title=%E2%80%9CDonald%20Trump%20signs%20pledge%20not%20to%20run%20as%20independent%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Shirley Abrahamson to 7th Circuit to Try to Get Chief Justice Job
Back <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75827>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 8:40 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75827>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Patrick Marley reports
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/shirley-abrahamson-appeals-in-attempt-to-reclaim-chief-justice-post-b99569818z1-324103141.html>.
I give this just over a 0% chance of success.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75827&title=Shirley%20Abrahamson%20to%207th%20Circuit%20to%20Try%20to%20Get%20Chief%20Justice%20Job%20Back&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Why Wouldn’t Congress Give Pagliano Immunity?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75824>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 8:36 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75824>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mike Stern explores.
<http://www.pointoforder.com/2015/09/03/why-wouldnt-congress-give-pagliano-immunity/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75824&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20Wouldn%E2%80%99t%20Congress%20Give%20Pagliano%20Immunity%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
“How Jimmy Carter championed civil rights — and Ronald Reagan
didn’t” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75821>
Posted onSeptember 3, 2015 8:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=75821>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ari Berman
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0906-berman-carter-civil-rights-20150906-story.html>in
the LAT:
When we look back on Reagan’s victory over Carter, we think of the
end of the Iran hostage crisis and the beginning of “Morning in
America.” Less well known is that Reagan’s triumph also ushered in a
counterrevolution against the country’s civil rights laws.
Whereas Carter had appointed Drew Days III, a former lawyer with the
NAACP Legal Defense Fund, to run the Justice Department’s Civil
Rights Division, Reagan installed the conservative lawyer William
Bradford Reynolds, who believed that “government-imposed
discrimination” had created “a kind of racial spoils system in
America,” favoring historically disadvantaged minorities over
whites. The future leaders of the contemporary conservative legal
movement, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., came of age
in the Reagan Justice Department, where they aggressively tried to
weaken the civil rights laws of the 1960s.
Now we live in the world Reagan created. The five conservative
justices on the Supreme Court who gutted the Voting Rights Act in
the 2013 decision Shelby County vs. Holder were all appointed by
Reagan or served in his administration. Reagan’s ideological
descendants, post-Shelby, have imposed strict voter-ID laws, cut
early voting and eliminated same-day voter registration.
I was surprised this piece did not mention the Carter-Baker commission’s
support for voter id laws (though Carter laterpulled
back<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=54915>from that support).
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D75821&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Jimmy%20Carter%20championed%20civil%20rights%20%E2%80%94%20and%20Ronald%20Reagan%20didn%E2%80%99t%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
--
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/20150907/902bc97e/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/20150907/902bc97e/attachment.png>
View list directory