[EL] ELB News and Commentary 4/13/16
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Apr 13 07:47:19 PDT 2016
“After Scalia: The Future of United States Election Law”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81848>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:43 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81848>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have postedthis draft in progress
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2763713>(forthcoming, in
Japanese translation, in /America-ho /(Biannual journal of the Japanese
American Society for Legal Studies) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This Essay, based on a keynote address prepared for delivery at the
2016 annual symposium of the Japanese American Society for Legal
Studies, explores the future of the election law jurisprudence in
the United States.
The February 2016 death of United States Supreme Court Justice
Antonin Scalia—a brilliant, bombastic, conservative jurist—provides
an opportunity to reflect on how the ideological views of members of
the Supreme Court have shaped elections and campaign rules in the
United States for many decades. His death reveals that the
replacement of even one Justice on a closely divided Court can flip
national rules for American elections by 180 degrees.
The Court’s election decisions have affected everything from role of
money in elections, to the rules for drawing legislative districts,
to the proper judicial response to partisan manipulation of voting
rules. One case in which Justice Scalia was in the majority even
decided a disputed presidential election, the 2000 contest between
Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore.
Justice Scalia wrote strong opinions in divided election law cases,
stating that limits on corporate spending in elections worked are
unconstitutional censorship; that courts do not have judicially
manageable tools to decide when partisan legislators take
self-interest too much into account in drawing legislative
districts; and that state governments should have a mostly free hand
in crafting election rules, even when the rules may be chosen for
partisan reasons and when they may severely burden a small number of
voters. He also controversially defended the end of vote counting in
the 2000 Florida election.
His conservative positions stand in stark contrast with the more
liberal positions that have emerged in election law cases: that
courts should defer to legislatures on the need to limit money in
politics; that courts have the power and tools to limit partisan
excesses in redistricting; and that courts should police cutbacks in
voting rights which may burden voters and be unjustified by any
important state interests.
Justice Scalia expressed his views with wit, intellect, sarcasm, and
force, crafting rhetorically effective opinions which nonetheless
usually failed to capture the votes of even one of his liberal
colleagues. With his death and his potential replacement by a more
liberal Justice, many of the positions he espoused could soon be
repudiated, and the rules for regulating politics in the United
States may change dramatically.
Whether or not Justice Scalia’s positions endure on the Supreme
Court, his views provide a benchmark against which to judge liberal
and conservative approaches to law and politics and to understand
the intersection of constitutional election law jurisprudence and
real political power in the coming decades.
I consider the state of American election law on money in politics,
partisan gerrymandering, and election administration through Justice
Scalia’s opinions in three major cases: Austin v. Michigan Chamber
of Commerce, Vieth v. Jubelirer, and Crawford v. Marion County
Election Board. I conclude with some brief thoughts on the Bush v.
Gore decision ending the 2000 election and the future of American
election law at the Supreme Court after Justice Scalia. I suggest
that there are dangers ahead for both American democracy and the
Supreme Court’s legitimacy given the current combination of a
Supreme Court with great power over election rules and the Court’s
new division not just along ideological lines but also along
partisan lines. We should expect to see election rules shift along
with partisan Supreme Court majorities, raising concerns about
American democracy.
Comments welcome!
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81848&title=%26%238220%3BAfter%20Scalia%3A%20The%20Future%20of%20United%20States%20Election%20Law%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,redistricting
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Civil Disobedience Against Corrupt Campaign Finance Shows Protest
Movement Is Growing” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81846>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81846>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Paul Blumenthal
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democracy-spring-arrests_us_570d08cae4b01422324a1ebd>for
HuffPo.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81846&title=%26%238220%3BCivil%20Disobedience%20Against%20Corrupt%20Campaign%20Finance%20Shows%20Protest%20Movement%20Is%20Growing%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,social
media and social protests <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=58>
“Kris Kobach offers new, lame defense for his ineptitude on voter
‘fraud'” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81844>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:35 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81844>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Yael Abouhalkah
column<http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/yael-t-abouhalkah/article71512747.html>in
the KC Star.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81844&title=%26%238220%3BKris%20Kobach%20offers%20new%2C%20lame%20defense%20for%20his%20ineptitude%20on%20voter%20%E2%80%98fraud%27%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>,The
Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“LLCs and Politics at the FEC” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81842>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:27 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81842>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brad Smith blogs
<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2016/04/12/llcs-and-politics-at-the-fec/>:
New rules going forward are one matter, punishing people after the
fact for a reasonable interpretation of the law that happens to
diverge from the thinking of some on the Commission is quite another.
It is worth noting that the FEC could have passed a regulation
clarifying the law long ago. But the normally pro-regulation wing of
the FEC has rejected any rulemaking that does not include provisions
of the “DISCLOSE Act” and other add-ons that have been explicitly
rejected by Congress. This desire to legislate, not simply enforce
the law, has poisoned the Commission’s ability to address changes in
the legal landscape. It is that intransigence that has created this
uncertain legal regime, which those same Commissioners are now using
to scapegoat honest attempts to comply with the law. That is
unfortunate.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81842&title=%26%238220%3BLLCs%20and%20Politics%20at%20the%20FEC%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,federal
election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“GOP Attempt to Change Nebraska’s Electoral Vote System Fails”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81840>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81840>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/gop-attempt-change-nebraskas-electoral-vote-system-fails-38343362>:
Nebraska’s Republican lawmakers were thwarted Tuesday in their
attempts to reinstate a winner-take-all system for presidential
electors, a move that would have increased the GOP nominee’s chances
of winning all five of the state’s votes in November.
The effort was derailed after supporters failed to overcome a
legislative filibuster, just as they were on the brink of approving
it. Had it passed, the bill would have ended the state’s practice of
allocating its electoral votes by congressional district.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81840&title=%26%238220%3BGOP%20Attempt%20to%20Change%20Nebraska%26%238217%3Bs%20Electoral%20Vote%20System%20Fails%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelectoral college <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>
“Court ruling opens way for those without ID to vote”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81838>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:23 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81838>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The /Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel/reports.
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/court-ruling-opens-way-for-those-without-id-to-vote-b99705675z1-375468971.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81838&title=%26%238220%3BCourt%20ruling%20opens%20way%20for%20those%20without%20ID%20to%20vote%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“The Pros And Cons Of Voter ID Laws”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81836>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81836>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Onion offers a list of pro’s (including “Less time-consuming form of
discrimination than literacy test”) and cons (“Doesn’t completely
eliminate possibility of undesirable populations from voting”).
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81836&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Pros%20And%20Cons%20Of%20Voter%20ID%20Laws%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection law "humor" <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52>,The
Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
Mann and Ornstein, Revisited, on Asymmetric Polarization
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81833>
Posted onApril 13, 2016 7:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81833>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Tom Mann and Norm Ornstein are out with a new version of their book,It’s
Even Worse Than It Looks
<http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional/dp/0465096204/ref=dp_ob_title_bk>(on
the cover “Looks” is crossed out and the word “Was” is written in). It
has a new afterward, which addresses, among other things, the Trump
phenomenon. The most controversial aspect of their book (and they talk
about reaction to their book in the new afterward) is their argument
that Republicans are more to blame for dysfunction in Washington than
Democrats, because Republican legislators moved more to the right than
Democrats to the left.
Here’s what I wrote about their bookin a 2012 /Slate/review:
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/05/thomas_mann_and_norman_ornstein_s_ideas_won_t_solve_washington_s_gridlock_.html>
In their new book,/It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American
Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism/
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465031331/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=slatmaga-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0465031331>/,/Thomas
Mann and Norman Ornstein offer both an insightful diagnosis of the
problem of a broken Washington and a set of proposed
solutions. Their diagnosis is mostly right—there’s a mismatch
between our form of government and our new, fiercely ideological
political parties. But their proposed solutions won’t get us very
far thanks to the very pathologies they identify. The cliché is
true: Washington is broken. But it’s even worse than Mann and
Ornstein say: It can’t be fixed.
Think of the most pressing domestic problem facing the country
today. Whether you choose persistent unemployment, the struggling
economic recovery, the housing market, health care, the social
security fund crisis, or the ballooning national debt, chances are
good that there is consensus that the problem is real and that the
president, a blue ribbon commission, or someone in Congress already
has proposed some solution. And chances are even better that the
proposed solution has no realistic chance of being enacted into law.
The problem, Mann and Ornstein tell us, is that we have increasingly
ideological parties working in a constitutional system premised on
the need for continued compromise to get things done. Thanks to our
Constitution and the rules of the House and Senate, any piece of
legislation must run through a series of “vetogates
<http://www.law.northwestern.edu/searlecenter/papers/Eskridge_Vetogates.pdf>”
to get passed, from congressional committees to the Senate
filibuster. (Schoolhouse Rock’s
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ>take is a bit quaint.
Try the/Daily Show/ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21060>instead.)
Without supermajority support for proposed legislation, it is next
to impossible to get anything through Congress these days. There is
no question that parties have become more ideological, with the most
conservative Democratmore liberal
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2011voteratings/congress-divided-2011-vote-ratings-20120223>than
the most liberal Republican in the Senate. (The causes are complex
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1646989>, but
come in large part from the movement of Southern conservatives from
the Democratic to Republican Party with the passage of civil rights
legislation.) Partisan competition is so intense these days that the
minority party does what it can to block even the/good /ideas of the
other party, in order to gain electoral advantage in the next
election. And just wait for thenext Supreme Court nomination
<http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/lugars-demise-and-the-constitutional-crisis.html>.
Mann and Ornstein have gained the most attention for their claim
that Republicans are more to blame than Democrats, a charge which
seems unfair. AsChris Cillizza explained
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/is-polarization-really-all-republicans-fault/2012/04/30/gIQAJXFAsT_blog.html>,
many of the extreme ideological Republicans in the House are doing
exactly what other members of the House are doing: representing the
interests of the constituents who elected them. The Tea Party crowds
who pushed for more extreme legislators got just what they hoped
for. It is not only the legislators who have a strong ideological,
no compromise attitude: The voters who elected them do, too. And
Democratic legislators have shown they can throw up roadblocks as
well as Republicans.
The focus on whether Republicans are more to blame has distracted
from the fundamental truth in Mann and Ornstein’s book: If such
ideological polarization persists, we would be much better off with
a British-style parliamentary system rather than our traditional
“separation of powers” approach to government. In a well-designed
parliamentary democracy, the majority party can actually govern, and
voters can punish that party when it governs badly or things go
wrong. Voters hold politicians accountable.
In retrospect, and with the rise of Trump and Cruz on the Republican
side, there is now no question that the Republican party has become
extreme, and more extreme than the Democrats. On this asymmetric
polarization point, I think Mann and Ornstein are right. The interesting
question going forward, and one which perhaps Mann and Ornstein will
address in the 2020 version of their book, is whether the
counter-reaction on the Democratic side, with the rise of Sanders and
Warren etc., means the Democrats will move parallel, further to the
left, creating conditions for even greater dysfunction. Or maybe the
Republican coalition comes apart and we end up with three parties for a
time (tea party, center-right, and liberal). Three parties would not be
stable, and so this portends a period of perhaps years of churn before
we likely settle into a new two-party pattern.
In any case, you should pick up the Mann/Ornstein book–but be prepared
to be disheartened about the current state American democracy.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81833&title=Mann%20and%20Ornstein%2C%20Revisited%2C%20on%20Asymmetric%20Polarization&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,political polarization
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>
“Sanders, Not Trump, Scaring Democratic Convention Donors”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81831>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 9:37 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81831>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA:
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=87170820&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0j2f5z7a8&split=0>
A new fundraising obstacle has emerged this election year—potential
individual and corporate donors to the 2016 Democratic National
Convention in Philadelphia have hesitated to contribute because of a
possible nomination of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said Ed Rendell,
chairman of the Democratic National Convention host committee.
Sanders has taken aim at big business, calling for the breakup of
big banks and a tax on Wall Street to fund tuition-free colleges and
universities and also wants the wealthiest Americans to pay their
“fair share” of taxes.
Rendell, who was a Democratic Pennsylvania governor and worked with
previous DNC host committees, said “there are always a few people
that have some excuse for not giving money,” but that it also has
been harder to raise funds this year because some donors who usually
finance both conventions are sitting them out to avoid any
association with a potential nomination of candidate Donald Trump at
the Republican National Convention.
However, Republican National Convention host committee President and
Chief Executive Officer David Gilbert said the prospects of a Trump
nomination are doing little to dampen corporate financial support
for this summer’s event in Cleveland. According to Gilbert and state
tax filings, the host committee is raising more funds in cash and at
a quicker pace than previous convention years. If that is true, it
raises the question of whether donors might only be withholding
support from the DNC convention in Philadelphia.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81831&title=%26%238220%3BSanders%2C%20Not%20Trump%2C%20Scaring%20Democratic%20Convention%20Donors%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Moffett: Most Voter Fraud Committed by Democrats
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81829>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 9:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81829>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mike Moffett in the Concord Monitor:
<http://www.concordmonitor.com/Opinion/Columns/My-Turn-For-Ayotte-supporters-voter-fraud-fear-is-real-1451820>
I can personally attest that every vote matters in a close election,
as my own 2014 state representative contest ended in a tie. I lost
by one vote in the recount.
The integrity of our process is crucial. Stolen elections cause wars
in other countries and massive cynicism in this one. Voter fraud
threatens our democracy.
And the Granite State is particularly at risk.
Liberal, same-day voter registration policies here invite abuse.
More than 35,000 voters registered on the last Election Day. And
most of them voted Democrat. Out-of-state college students who voted
via absentee ballots in their home states got a second vote in New
Hampshire. Appalling.
Google “voter fraud” and you’ll find countless alleged and
documented examples of these sorry practices. The vast majority of
these crimes are committed by Democrats. To quote Casey Stengel,
“You can look it up.”
Lovely.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81829&title=Moffett%3A%20Most%20Voter%20Fraud%20Committed%20by%20Democrats&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>
Trump Gives Republicans a Taste of Their Own Medicine with Talk of
Stolen Elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81827>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 9:21 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81827>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/13/us/politics/donald-trump-losing-ground-tries-to-blame-the-system.html?ref=politics&_r=0>on
Trump’s trumped up charges:
Donald J. Trump
<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/donald-trump-on-the-issues.html?inline=nyt-per>and
his allies are engaged in an aggressive effort to undermine the
Republican nominating process by framing it as rigged and corrupt,
hoping to compensate for organizational deficiencies that have left
Mr. Trump with an increasingly precarious path to the nomination.
Their message: The election is being stolen from him.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump berated the politicians he said were trying to
stop his nomination and denounced theRepublican Party
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/r/republican_party/index.html?inline=nyt-org>,
which he cast as complicit in the theft.
“Our Republican system is absolutely rigged. It’s a phony deal,” he
said, accusing party leaders of maneuvering to cut his supporters
out of the process. “They wanted to keep people out. This is a dirty
trick.”…
His effort to sow doubt about the system plays into the suspicions
and anxieties that many of his most ardent backers have about a
political process they believe has intentionally disenfranchised
them. And it allows Mr. Trump to divert attention from his recent
losses in delegate races occurring all over the country.
Mr. Trump has a pattern of claiming fraud when an election does not
go his way. And his critics say this kind of misdirection is his
specialty.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81827&title=Trump%20Gives%20Republicans%20a%20Taste%20of%20Their%20Own%20Medicine%20with%20Talk%20of%20Stolen%20Elections&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>
“Kris Kobach defends prosecution of voter fraud cases in Kansas”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81823>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 5:26 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81823>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Weak defense.
<http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article71453637.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81823&title=%26%238220%3BKris%20Kobach%20defends%20prosecution%20of%20voter%20fraud%20cases%20in%20Kansas%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>,The
Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
Breaking: 7th Cir. Revives As-Applied Challenge to WI Voter ID Law
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81820>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 5:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81820>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
As expected <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81699>, a unanimous 7th
Circuit panel,in an opinion
<http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2016/D04-12/C:15-3582:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1736108:S:0>by
Judge Easterbrook, has reversed a lower court and ordered that court to
consider whether Wisconsin’s voter id law unconstitutionally burdens the
right to vote or those voters who face extra burdens in obtaining proper
voter identification to vote in Wisconsin. Some very helpful (and
surprising, given the earlier decision) language from Judge Easterbrook,
which should help with as-applied challenges:
The argument plaintiffs now present is different. Instead of saying
that inconvenience for some voters means that no one needs photo ID,
plaintiffs contend that high hurdles for some persons eligible to
vote entitle those particular persons to relief. Plaintiffs’
approach is potentially sound if even a single person eligible to
vote is unable to get acceptable photo ID with reasonable effort.
The right to vote is personal and is not defeated by the fact that
99% of other people can secure the necessary credentials easily.
Plaintiffs now accept the propriety of requiring photo ID from
persons who already have or can get it with reasonable effort, while
endeavoring to protect the voting rights of those who encounter high
hurdles. This is compatible with our opinion and mandate, just as it
is compatible with Crawford. Indeed, one may understand plaintiffs
as seeking for Wisconsin the sort of safety net that Indiana has had
from the outset.
Here
<https://www.aclu.org/news/federal-appeals-court-revives-challenge-wisconsins-voter-id-law>is
the ACLU press release.
I discuss the disappointing results of as-applied and other softening
devices in relation to as-applied challenges in Softening Voter ID Laws
Through Litigation: Is it Enough? (draft in progress, Mar. 2016
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80636>).
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81820&title=Breaking%3A%207th%20Cir.%20Revives%20As-Applied%20Challenge%20to%20WI%20Voter%20ID%20Law&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Breaking: NJ Admin. Judge Rejects Challenge to Cruz Eligibility
Under the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81818>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 5:08 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81818>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
In a detailed 26-page
opinion<https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2800337/Ted-Cruz-Decision.pdf>drawing
on Founding documents and practice, and recent writings of legal
scholars (including in blog posts), a NJ administrative law judge has
rejected a challenge to Ted Cruz’s eligibility to appear on the ballot
as a presidential candidate in New Jersey.
The Lt. Gov. makes the final call, and that call could be challenged in
a further judicial proceeding.
But for now, Cruz’s position on the NJ ballot remains safe. (I’ve
argued thatthis is the right result, <https://t.co/Vn1qVlUt2V>but not on
originalism grounds).
UPDATE: Derek Muller inunimpressed.
<http://excessofdemocracy.com/blog/2016/4/new-jersey-administrative-law-judge-perpetuates-natural-born-citizen-procedural-errors>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81818&title=Breaking%3A%20NJ%20Admin.%20Judge%20Rejects%20Challenge%20to%20Cruz%20Eligibility%20Under%20the%20%26%238220%3BNatural%20Born%20Citizen%26%238221%3B%20Clause&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Colorado Democrats admit mistake that cost Bernie Sanders key
delegate” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81816>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 1:11 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81816>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Denver Post
<http://www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29755029/colorado-democrats-admit-mistake-that-cost-bernie-sanders>:
Bernie Sanders won one more delegate in Colorado thanfirst projected
<http://www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29583893/bernie-sanders-defeats-hillary-clinton-colorado-democratic-caucus>after
the Colorado Democratic Party admitted this week that it misreported
the March 1 caucus results from 10 precinct locations.
The party discovered the discrepancy a week after the caucus but did
not correct the public record.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign discussed the error with state party
officials last week, but the Sanders campaign apparently didn’t
realize the issue until being informed Monday evening by The Denver
Post.
Kill the caucuses.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81816&title=%26%238220%3BColorado%20Democrats%20admit%20mistake%20that%20cost%20Bernie%20Sanders%20key%20delegate%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Judge hears arguments as GOP supporters try to loosen campaign
donation limits” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81814>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:31 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81814>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Alaska Dispatch:
<https://www.adn.com/article/20160411/judge-hears-arguments-gop-supporters-try-loosen-campaign-donation-limits>
A federal judge on Monday heard the first arguments in a case that
challenges the state’s limits on donations to political candidates
and groups, setting the stage for a seven-day trial set to begin
later this month.
The lawsuit against the state — brought by three supporters of
Republican candidates and an Anchorage Republican district committee
— has its roots in recent federal cases that have equated free
speech with campaign contributions.
The Alaska Republican Party District 18 in Anchorage and the three
individual plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge Timothy Burgess to
strike down annual limits on contributions from political parties
and nonresidents, as well as the $500 annual limit that individuals
can make to candidates and to groups other than political parties.
The trial is set to begin April 25 in Anchorage.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81814&title=%26%238220%3BJudge%20hears%20arguments%20as%20GOP%20supporters%20try%20to%20loosen%20campaign%20donation%20limits%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“What Happens To Democracy After You Gut The Voting Rights Act, In
One Map” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81812>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81812>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Think Progress.
<http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/12/3768441/voter-suppression-map/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81812&title=%26%238220%3BWhat%20Happens%20To%20Democracy%20After%20You%20Gut%20The%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%2C%20In%20One%20Map%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Two outside groups air new ads in Maryland Senate race”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81810>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:22 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81810>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Baltimore Sun
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/blog/bal-two-outside-groups-air-new-ads-in-maryland-senate-race-20160412-story.html>:
A pair of third-party groups that have not disclosed their funding
began airing attack ads Tuesday as the high-profile contest for
Maryland’s openSenate
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/topic/politics-government/government/u.s.-senate-ORGOV0000134-topic.html>seat
entered its final two weeks.
A union-backed group called Committee for Maryland’s Progress
purchased broadcast airtime in Baltimore to run an ad that argues
Rep. Donna F. Edwards is “ranked one of the least effective members
of Congress.” Another group called Working For Us began a new spot
claiming Rep. Chris Van Hollen crafted a loophole for the National
Rifle Association.
Both ads fail to offer a fully accurate picture of the candidates’
records, and both have been put on the air by organizations that
have not disclosed donors — illustrating the limited clarity voters
often have when assessing last-minute political advertising.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81810&title=%26%238220%3BTwo%20outside%20groups%20air%20new%20ads%20in%20Maryland%20Senate%20race%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Lawyers suing Doe prosecutors help Brad Schimel draft brief”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81808>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:19 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81808>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Patrick
Marley<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/lawyers-suing-doe-prosecutors-help-brad-schimel-draft-brief-b99705334z1-375436591.html>for
the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel relied on help from lawyers
suing prosecutors and investigators when he filed a
friend-of-the-court brief in January that would make it harder for
Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm to defend himself.
Documents released Tuesday under the state’s open records law show
the lawyers suing Chisholm provided Schimel’s team with an outline
of how to frame its argument trying to keep Chisholm from having
easy access to material seized in a probe of Gov. Scott Walker’s
campaign.
The release of the records highlights an unusual situation — the
state’s top lawyer working with attorneys who hope to force
taxpayers to shell out money because of the actions of public officials.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81808&title=%26%238220%3BLawyers%20suing%20Doe%20prosecutors%20help%20Brad%20Schimel%20draft%20brief%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“The Not So Super Delegates” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81806>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:18 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81806>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Emma Roller NYT column.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/12/opinion/campaign-stops/the-not-so-super-delegates.html?_r=0>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81806&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Not%20So%20Super%20Delegates%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
“Trump’s delay in building a delegate operation may cost him the
nomination” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81804>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 12:18 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81804>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ben Jacobs reports
<http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/12/donald-trump-delegates-republican-nomination-us-election-2016>for
The Guardian.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81804&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%E2%80%99s%20delay%20in%20building%20a%20delegate%20operation%20may%20cost%20him%20the%20nomination%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
Josh Marshall—Sanders Benefits Most from Undemocratic Aspects of
Democratic Primary Process <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81802>
Posted onApril 12, 2016 9:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81802>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This seems right
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/time-to-reform-big-sanders>, and
makes me wonder why Sanders might not push for more substantive things
on economic inequality and campaign finance reform from Clinton to get
his support.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81802&title=Josh%20Marshall%26%238212%3BSanders%20Benefits%20Most%20from%20Undemocratic%20Aspects%20of%20Democratic%20Primary%20Process&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/20160413/dc9397e4/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/20160413/dc9397e4/attachment.png>
View list directory