[EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/28/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Sep 28 07:40:51 PDT 2015
“Why The Most Urgent Civil Rights Cause Of Our Time Is The Supreme
Court Itself” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76246>
Posted onSeptember 28, 2015 7:39 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76246>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have writtenthis longread for TPM,
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/supreme-court-greatest-civil-rights-cause>and
I’ve been working on it for quite some time. It begins:
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.
When the next President of the United States assumes office on
January 20, 2017, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be nearly 84,
Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy will be over 80, and
Justice Stephen Breyer will be 78. Although many Justices have
served on the Court into their 80s and beyond, the chances for all
of these Justices remaining through the next 4 or 8 years of the
45th President are slim. Indeed, the next president will likely make
multiple appointments to the Court.
The stakes are high. On non-controversial cases, or cases where the
ideological stakes are low, the Justices often agree and are
sometimes unanimous. In such cases, the Justices act much like lower
court judges do, applying precedents, text, history, and a range of
interpretative tools to decide cases. In the most controversial
cases, however—those involving issues such as gun rights,
affirmative action, abortion, money in politics, privacy, and
federal power—the value judgments and ideology of the Supreme Court
Justices, and increasingly the party affiliation of the president
appointing them, are good predictors of each Justice’s vote.
A conservative like Justice Scalia tends to vote to uphold abortion
restrictions, strike down gun restrictions, and view the First
Amendment as protecting the right to spend unlimited sums in
elections. A liberal like Justice Ginsburg tends to vote the
opposite way: to strike down abortion restrictions, uphold gun laws,
and view the government’s interest in stopping undue influence of
money in elections as justifying some limits on money in politics.
This to not to say it is just politics in these cases, or that these
Justices are making crassly partisan decisions. They’re not. It is
that increasingly a Justice’s ideology and jurisprudence line up
with one political party’s positions or another because Justices are
chosen for that very reason.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76246&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20The%20Most%20Urgent%20Civil%20Rights%20Cause%20Of%20Our%20Time%20Is%20The%20Supreme%20Court%20Itself%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Chief Justice John Roberts Amasses Conservative Record, and the
Right’s Ire” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76244>
Posted onSeptember 28, 2015 7:37 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76244>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Adam
Liptak<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/politics/chief-justice-john-roberts-amasses-conservative-record-and-the-rights-ire.html?ref=politics&_r=0>NYT
Sidebar column:
Political scientists say the conservative critique has a little
merit, but not much. An analysis of voting patterns over the last
decade shows Chief Justice Roberts to be well to the right of
Justices Kennedy and Souter.
But a comparison of his votes with those of Justice Samuel A. Alito
Jr., who was appointed by Mr. Bush in 2006, tells a slightly
different story. The two started out ideologically
indistinguishable. But Justice Alito has trended right, and Chief
Justice Roberts left.
A recent study
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/682696?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents>in
The Journal of Legal Studies and related data presented an even more
nuanced picture. It ranked the justices in ideological order and was
prepared by Lee Epstein, a law professor and political scientist at
Washington University in St. Louis; William M. Landes, a law
professor and economist at the University of Chicago; and Judge
Richard A. Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit in Chicago.
They found that Chief Justice Roberts voted in a conservative
direction 58 percent of the time over the last decade, while
Justices Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas ranged from 61 to
65 percent.
But the chief justice leaned right when it mattered most. “He is a
reliable conservative in the most closely contested cases but
moderate when his vote cannot change the outcome,” the study said.
In 5-to-4 cases, the study found, Chief Justice Roberts voted in a
conservative direction 85 percent of the time, a higher rate than
that of any other member of the court.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76244&title=%E2%80%9CChief%20Justice%20John%20Roberts%20Amasses%20Conservative%20Record%2C%20and%20the%20Right%E2%80%99s%20Ire%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Public Supports SEC Rule on Corporate Political Disclosure
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76242>
Posted onSeptember 28, 2015 7:36 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76242>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
From Lisa Gilbert:
I wanted to flag important polling released Friday by Public Policy
Polling which shows that 88% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats
want the SEC to issue a rule requiring publicly traded corporations
to disclose their political spending.
This polling (*Republican sample*
<http://demandprogress.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=473283de10f9c69c998b8e3cd&id=1256f59cb5&e=f8c3a10d46>,*Democratic
sample*
<http://demandprogress.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=473283de10f9c69c998b8e3cd&id=759af3eaab&e=f8c3a10d46>),
bolsters the already broad support behind the political spending
disclosure rule that I know you are familiar with. Investors are
calling for the rule, a record-breaking 1.2 million public comments
have been submitted in support from retail investors and the public,
and a recent letter supporting the rulemaking by a bipartisan set of
former SEC chairmen solidifies the strong grounds the commission has
to move forward.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76242&title=Public%20Supports%20SEC%20Rule%20on%20Corporate%20Political%20Disclosure&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Evenwel Amicus Brief of LA and 19 Cities and Counties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76239>
Posted onSeptember 28, 2015 7:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76239>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Evenwel-Los-Angeles-Amicus-Brief.pdf>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76239&title=Evenwel%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20LA%20and%2019%20Cities%20and%20Counties&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Bloomberg Poll: Americans Want Supreme Court to Turn Off Political
Spending Spigot” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76237>
Posted onSeptember 28, 2015 7:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76237>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Greg Stohr
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-28/bloomberg-poll-americans-want-supreme-court-to-turn-off-political-spending-spigot?cmpid=BBD092815_POL>for
Bloomberg:
mericans may be sharply divided on other issues, but they are united
in their view of the 2010 Supreme Court ruling that unleashed a
torrent of political spending: They hate it.
In a new Bloomberg Politics national poll, 78 percent of those
responding said the Citizens United ruling should be overturned,
compared with 17 percent who called it a good decision.
“Wow. Wow. I’m stunned,” said David Strauss, a constitutional law
professor who teaches at the University of Chicago. “What it
suggests is that Citizens United has become a symbol for what people
perceive to be a much larger problem, which is the undue influence
of wealth in politics.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76237&title=%E2%80%9CBloomberg%20Poll%3A%20Americans%20Want%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20Turn%20Off%20Political%20Spending%20Spigot%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Judges’ Elections Get New Scrutiny; Bronx district attorney’s
nomination for state Supreme Court brings issue to the fore”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76234>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 7:15 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76234>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/judges-elections-get-new-scrutiny-1443402506>:
Bronx District Attorney Robert Johnson’s quick transformation from a
candidate for re-election to anominee for state court justice
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/bronx-district-attorney-robert-johnson-wins-democratic-nod-for-state-supreme-court-1443146019>—without
a vote being cast—is raising questions about the clout that state
election law gives to party leaders and shedding light on New York’s
largely obscure judicial electoral system.
Judicial delegates for the Democratic Party in the Bronx gathered in
a low-ceilinged ballroom Thursday night to nominate Mr. Johnson to
one of six spots on this year’s ballot for state Supreme Court in
the borough. Mr. Johnson is all but assured the seat in the Nov. 3
election because the Bronx is overwhelmingly Democratic.
For years, the state’s judicial-selection process has been
criticized as opaque and undemocratic, a system in which
delegates—often party loyalists, including elected officials and
their family members—rubber-stamp candidates handpicked by county
party leaders.
In the Bronx Thursday, there wasn’t a dissenting vote cast, or an
alternate candidate put forward to run in November.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76234&title=%E2%80%9CJudges%E2%80%99%20Elections%20Get%20New%20Scrutiny%3B%20Bronx%20district%20attorney%E2%80%99s%20nomination%20for%20state%20Supreme%20Court%20brings%20issue%20to%20the%20fore%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted injudicial elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the Voting Wars, Voting Rights, and Voting
Reform <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76232>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 7:12 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76232>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
From aspeech today
<http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=967>at theEdward
Kennedy Institute
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/27/elizabeth-warren-just-gave-the-speech-that-black-lives-matter-activists-have-been-waiting-for/>:
And what about voting rights? Two years ago, five conservative
justices on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, opening
the floodgates ever wider for measures designed to suppress minority
voting. Today, the specific tools of oppression have changed-voter
ID laws, racial gerrymandering, and mass disfranchisement through a
criminal justice system that disproportionately incarcerates black
citizens. The tools have changed, but black voters are still
deliberately cut out of the political process.
…Next, voting.
It’s time to call out the recent flurry of new state law
restrictions for what they are: an all-out campaign by Republicans
to take away the right to vote from poor and black and Latino
American citizens who probably won’t vote for them. The push to
restrict voting is nothing more than a naked grab to win elections
that they can’t win if every citizen votes.
Two years ago the Supreme Court eviscerated critical parts of the
Voting Rights Act. Congress could easily fix this, and Democrats in
the Senate have called for restoration of voting rights. Now it is
time for Republicans to step up to support a restoration of the
Voting Rights Act-or to stand before the American people and explain
why they have abandoned America’s most cherished liberty, the right
to vote.
And while we’re at it, we need to update the rules around voting.
Voting should be simple. Voter registration should be automatic. Get
a driver’s license, get registered automatically. Nonviolent,
law-abiding citizens should not lose the right to vote because of a
prior conviction. Election Day should be a holiday, so no one has to
choose between a paycheck and a vote. Early voting and vote by mail
would give fast food and retail workers who don’t get holidays day
off a chance to proudly cast their votes. The hidden discrimination
that comes with purging voter rolls and short-staffing polling
places must stop. The right to vote remains essential to protect all
other rights, and no candidate for president or for any other
elected office – Republican or Democrat – should be elected if they
will not pledge to support full, meaningful voting rights.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76232&title=Sen.%20Elizabeth%20Warren%20on%20the%20Voting%20Wars%2C%20Voting%20Rights%2C%20and%20Voting%20Reform&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Capitol Gains: S.C. politicians use office to pad pockets”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76230>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 5:25 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76230>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Extensive CPI report:
<http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/09/25/18048/capitol-gains-sc-politicians-use-office-pad-pockets>
South Carolina elected officials and candidates have what amounts to
a personal ATM that dispensed nearly $100 million since 2009 for
such things as car repairs, football tickets, male-enhancement
pills, GoPro cameras, overseas junkets and gasoline.
A joint investigation by The Center for Public Integrity and /The
Post and Courier/
<http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150925/PC1603/150929554>also found
state lawmakers and candidates used this cash machine to hire their
own companies, pay parking tickets, purchase an AARP membership
— and even buy a used BMW convertible for “parades.”
The money funding this political cash machine comes from candidates’
campaign accounts, reimbursements from state government and outright
gifts from special interests.
The inner workings of this cash network typically remain hidden
unless prosecutors subpoena questionable receipts and other evidence
locked away from public view, as happened in the case of ex-House
Speaker Bobby Harrell.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76230&title=%E2%80%9CCapitol%20Gains%3A%20S.C.%20politicians%20use%20office%20to%20pad%20pockets%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Chris Rickert: Photo ID no-brainer would bring a little sense to
two brainless GOP initiatives” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76228>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 4:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76228>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Column
<http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/columnists/chris-rickert/chris-rickert-photo-id-no-brainer-would-bring-a-little/article_c1f54d63-c478-55d3-aec4-4cb67cc12bac.html>in
Wisconsin State Journal:
A couple of astute readers contacted me this week with an idea for
making at least a little sense out of the senseless:
If the Republican-controlled Legislature passesa bill
<https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2015/proposals/ab222>to add photos
of food stamp recipients to their food stamp debit cards, why not
make the cards valid IDs for voting under the state’s recently
upheld voter ID law?
Adding photos to the debit cards used in the state food stamps
program — known asQuest cards
<https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/foodshare/ebt.htm>andFoodShare
<https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/foodshare/index.htm>, respectively —
could be a cost-efficient way to help guard against a small portion
of the indeterminate amount of fraud in the FoodShare program and
protect democracy from a voter fraud problem thatstudies have shown
doesn’t exist
<https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/truth-about-voter-fraud>.
Talk about killing two (mostly imaginary) birds with one stone.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76228&title=%E2%80%9CChris%20Rickert%3A%20Photo%20ID%20no-brainer%20would%20bring%20a%20little%20sense%20to%20two%20brainless%20GOP%20initiatives%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
“It’s make or break time for Jeb Bush”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76226>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 3:24 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76226>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/its-make-or-break-time-for-jeb-bush/2015/09/27/73d5f6fa-63c0-11e5-b38e-06883aacba64_story.html?postshare=7821443381559407>:
Jeb Bush is entering a critical phase of his Republican presidential
campaign, with top donors warning that the former Florida governor
needs to demonstrate growth in the polls over the next month or face
serious defections among supporters.
The warnings, expressed by numerous senior GOP fundraisers in recent
days, come as Bush and an allied super PAC are in the early stages
of an aggressive television ad campaign that they believe will help
erase doubts about his viability.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76226&title=%E2%80%9CIt%E2%80%99s%20make%20or%20break%20time%20for%20Jeb%20Bush%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
SOS Kobach Doesn’t Like Being Called a Racist
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76224>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 10:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76224>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Watch the video
<http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article36623058.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76224&title=SOS%20Kobach%20Doesn%E2%80%99t%20Like%20Being%20Called%20a%20Racist&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Very Sad News: Doug Kendall Has Died
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76222>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 10:13 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76222>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Sad news
<http://theusconstitution.org/media/releases/constitutional-accountability-center-mourns-passing-doug-kendall-its-visionary>of
an untimely death: “Doug Kendall
<http://theusconstitution.org/about/people/director-staff/doug-kendall>,
progressive litigator, author, activist, non-profit entrepreneur – named
a “Visionary
<http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/NLJ-Visionaries-Award-Doug-Kendall.pdf>”
by the National Law Journal in 2011 – and founding president of
Constitutional Accountability Center since June 2008, passed away today
from complications of colon cancer. He was 51.”
Jack Balkin
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/09/doug-kendall-patriot-and-visionary.html>:
Doug organized the Constitutional Accountability Center to promote
his deeply held belief that the Constitution is at its core a
document of progress. He maintained that our Constitution’s text,
history and structure pointed toward ever greater protection for
freedom and equality. In an era when conservative originalists
claimed a monopoly on constitutional fidelity, Doug Kendall spoke
confidently and eloquently for a progressive constitutional faith.
He defended the great achievements of American constitutionalism and
argued that they were fully consistent with the Constitution’s text
and history. He yielded to no one in his devotion and commitment to
fidelity to the United States Constitution.
Doug gave these ideas life through his tireless efforts in
scholarship, litigation, and institution-building. And he succeeded
beyond what anyone could have imagined when he began. He was a great
man doing great things. We are all in his debt.
Randy Barnett
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/09/27/doug-kendall-rip/>:
By and large I disagreed with the constitutional stances of his CAC.
For example, during the constitutional challenge to the Affordable
Care Act, I frequently appeared with his close colleague Elizabeth
Wydra, who passionately defended the constitutionality of the
individual insurance mandate. But, even where I disagree with their
conclusions, the briefs and arguments submitted by the Constitution
Accountability Center make a vital contribution to the adversary
process by which claims of original meaning should be vetted.
Doug Kendall was a true gentleman who loved the Constitution. My
deepest sympathy goes out to his family and his colleagues. He was a
force to be reckoned with during his life and, with the
Constitutional Accountability Center he founded, his force will
continue long after his passing.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76222&title=Very%20Sad%20News%3A%20Doug%20Kendall%20Has%20Died&description=>
Posted inelection law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>
“Longtime Indiana lawmaker Bill Crawford remembered as a ‘giant
among men'” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76220>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 10:08 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76220>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See thisIndy Star obituary.
<http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/09/25/bill-crawford-long-time-indiana-lawmaker-dies/72806814/>
Crawford was also the lead main plaintiff in the case challenging the
constitutionality of Indiana’s voter id law, a case which made it to
theSupreme Court <https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-21.ZO.html>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76220&title=%E2%80%9CLongtime%20Indiana%20lawmaker%20Bill%20Crawford%20remembered%20as%20a%20%E2%80%98giant%20among%20men%27%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection 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>
More Evenwel Amicus Briefs <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76212>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 10:04 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76212>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Following up onthis listing <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76195>, I
have received the following additional amicus briefs (all supporting Texas):
Brief of 21 state attorneys general
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-The-States.pdf>
Lawyers’ Committee
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Lawyers-Committee.pdf>
New York City
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940_bsac_New-York-City.pdf>
Texas Senators
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Texas-Senators.pdf>
Direct Action for Rights and Equality et al.
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Direct-Action-for-Rights-et-al..pdf>
NAACP LDF <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Evenwel_Amicus.pdf>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76212&title=More%20Evenwel%20Amicus%20Briefs&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“The Soaring Price of Political Access”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76210>
Posted onSeptember 27, 2015 9:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76210>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT editorial
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/27/opinion/sunday/the-soaring-price-of-political-access.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0>:
This year, the political money is flowing more like overpriced wine,
with the two national parties reported to be planning tenfold
increases in the rates V.I.P. donors will be charged to secure the
right to attend exclusive dinners and presidential convention forums
with candidates and party leaders.
This means that top-tier Republican donors will pay $1.34 million
per couple for the privilege of being treated as party insiders,
while the Democratic Party will charge about $1.6 million,according
to The Washington Post
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/political-parties-go-after-million-dollar-donors-in-wake-of-looser-rules/2015/09/19/728b43fe-5ede-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html>.
Four years ago the most an individual could give to a national party
was $30,800. This time, that top $1.34 million ticket for a couple
in the Republican National Committee’s Presidential Trust tier,
reserved for the “most elite R.N.C. investors,” promises “influence
messaging and strategy” opportunities at exclusive party dinners and
retreats, according to a description obtained by The Post….
While Democrats led by Hillary Rodham Clinton have called for broad
reforms of campaign fund-raising, Mrs. Clinton and party leaders say
they will emulate Republican tactics in going after big money if
that’s what it takes to compete. At what cost to democracy is the
looming question for voters.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76210&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Soaring%20Price%20of%20Political%20Access%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
“Sacramento County seeks review of elections office”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76203>
Posted onSeptember 25, 2015 7:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76203>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
SacBee:
<http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/local-election/article35055948.html>
Sacramento County plans to hire a consultant to review its elections
office following complaints from city clerks about the handling of
last year’s elections.
As reported by The Sacramento Bee last month
<http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/the-public-eye/article29754133.html>,
current and former clerks in Sacramento, Galt and Rancho Cordova
said the elections office had become less reliable in the past 18
months. The office published inaccurate information about contests
in Sacramento and Rancho Cordova in sample ballot guides and
provided Galt’s clerk with wrong information about the ballot order
of council races, among other things.
The complaints are one reason Sacramento County Chief Deputy
Executive Paul Lake is asking for a review of the office. As head of
the Countywide Services agency, Lake oversees the office and its
chief, Registrar of Voters Jill LaVine.
“We want to see what we can do to improve,” he said. “We want to
have good customer service.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76203&title=%E2%80%9CSacramento%20County%20seeks%20review%20of%20elections%20office%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
Amicus Briefs in Evenwel Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76195>
Posted onSeptember 25, 2015 7:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76195>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’ve already linked to thePersily et al. brief.
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/evenwel-persily-Brief.pdf>
I have also received briefs from:
the DNC
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940bsacDemocraticNationalCommittee.pdf>
Common Cause
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Common-Cause.pdf>
Harris County
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Harris-Cty-Tx.pdf>
Brennan Center
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Brennan-Center-Amicus-Curiae-Brief.pdf>
Former census bureau directors
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-Former-Directors-of-the-U.S.-Census-Bureau.pdf>
Constitutional Accountability Center
<http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Evenwel_v_Abbott_Amicus_Final.pdf>
ACLU
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/14-940-bsac-The-American-Civil-Liberties-Union.pdf>
Here is a list of additional briefs on the merits via Moritz
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/Evenwel.v.Abbott.php>:
* Brief for Appellants
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelBrief07312015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 7/31/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of ACRU
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelACLUBrief08052015.pdf>[corrected]pdf
file(filed 8/05/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund,
Inc.
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelEagleFound08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Project
21<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelProject21Brief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Tennessee State Legislators and The Judicial
Education Project
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelEagleFound08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amici Curiae of Cato Institute and Reason Foundation
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelCatoBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Mountain States Legal Foundation
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelMountStatesBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amici Curiae of Demographers Peter A. Morrison, et al
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelDemographersBrief08072015.pdf>.pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelCenterConBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Immigration Reform Law Institute
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelImmiReformBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amici Curiae of Judicial Watch, Inc., et al.
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelJudicialWatchBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief Amicus Curiae of Yakima, Washington
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/EvenwelYakimaBrief08072015.pdf>pdf
file(filed 8/07/15)
* Brief of Appellees
<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Evenwel-TexasBrief091815.pdf>pdf
file(filed 9/18/15)
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D76195&title=Amicus%20Briefs%20in%20Evenwel%20Case&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,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/20150928/965190cd/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/20150928/965190cd/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: icon-acrosmall.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 125 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150928/965190cd/attachment.gif>
View list directory