[EL] Citizens United poll

Bill Maurer wmaurer at ij.org
Mon Sep 28 10:05:15 PDT 2015 

The poll about Citizens United is pretty remarkable because it’s exactly the same percentage of people who support proof of citizenship before a person can vote.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2014/78_favor_proof_of_citizenship_before_being_allowed_to_vote

It’s a good thing that we have a Constitution that protects the rights of individuals from the whims of majorities—including large majorities. In fact, it is probably when majorities are at their most unified that the protections of the Constitution become all the more important.

Bill

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 7:41 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 9/28/15

“Why The Most Urgent Civil Rights Cause Of Our Time Is The Supreme Court Itself”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76246>
Posted on September 28, 2015 7:39 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76246> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I have written this 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 in campaign 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 on September 28, 2015 7:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76244> by Rick 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 in Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Public Supports SEC Rule on Corporate Political Disclosure<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76242>
Posted on September 28, 2015 7:36 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76242> by Rick 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 in campaign 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 on September 28, 2015 7:25 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76239> by Rick 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 in redistricting<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 on September 28, 2015 7:22 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76237> by Rick 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 in campaign 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 on September 27, 2015 7:15 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76234> by Rick 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 a nominee 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 in judicial elections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the Voting Wars, Voting Rights, and Voting Reform<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76232>
Posted on September 27, 2015 7:12 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76232> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

From a speech today<http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=967> at the Edward 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 in The 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 on September 27, 2015 5:25 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76230> by Rick 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 in campaign 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 on September 27, 2015 4:46 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76228> by Rick 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 passes a 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> and FoodShare<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 that studies 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 in election 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 on September 27, 2015 3:24 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76226> by Rick 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 in campaign 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 on September 27, 2015 10:16 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76224> by Rick 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 in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Very Sad News: Doug Kendall Has Died<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76222>
Posted on September 27, 2015 10:13 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76222> by Rick 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 in election law biz<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>
“Longtime Indiana lawmaker Bill Crawford remembered as a ‘giant among men'”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76220>
Posted on September 27, 2015 10:08 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76220> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

See this Indy 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 the Supreme 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 in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
More Evenwel Amicus Briefs<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76212>
Posted on September 27, 2015 10:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76212> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Following up on this 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 in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“The Soaring Price of Political Access”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76210>
Posted on September 27, 2015 9:54 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76210> by Rick 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&region=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 in campaign 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 on September 25, 2015 7:16 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76203> by Rick 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 in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
Amicus Briefs in Evenwel Case<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76195>
Posted on September 25, 2015 7:14 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=76195> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I’ve already linked to the Persily 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 in redistricting<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<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>

hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/

http://electionlawblog.org

________________________________

Spam<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09PmCFHMM&m=c9ab3fe21140&t=20150928&c=s>
Phish/Fraud<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09PmCFHMM&m=c9ab3fe21140&t=20150928&c=p>
Not spam<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09PmCFHMM&m=c9ab3fe21140&t=20150928&c=n>
Forget previous vote<https://antispam.roaringpenguin.com/canit/b.php?i=09PmCFHMM&m=c9ab3fe21140&t=20150928&c=f>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150928/757e567c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150928/757e567c/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 125 bytes
Desc: image002.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150928/757e567c/attachment.gif>

View list directory