[EL] ELB News and Commentary 4/21/16

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu Apr 21 07:44:48 PDT 2016


    “Supreme Court Upholds Arizona’s Redrawn Legislative Map”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82102>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:42 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82102>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Adam Liptak 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/us/politics/supreme-court-upholds-arizonas-redrawn-legislative-map.html?ref=politics>in 
the NYT.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82102&title=%26%238220%3BSupreme%20Court%20Upholds%20Arizona%E2%80%99s%20Redrawn%20Legislative%20Map%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Clinton Campaign Money Legal but Problematic”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82100>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:38 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82100>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Eliza Newlin Carney 
<http://prospect.org/article/clinton-campaign-money-legal-problematic>for TAP:

    In legal terms, Bernie Sanders’s complaint that Hillary Clinton’s
    joint fundraising agreement with the Democratic National Committee
    improperly benefits her campaign doesn’t withstand close scrutiny.

    The Sanders camp’s professed shock that the Hillary Victory Fund is
    collecting contributions “as high as $353,400 or more” says less
    about Clinton’s fundraising than it does about the near-total
    deregulation of the nation’s campaign-finance system. Sanders lawyer
    Brad C. Deutsch’sletter
    <https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Bernie-2016-Letter-to-DNC-1.pdf>to
    the DNC cites no actual rules violations, and manages to contradict
    itself….

    Nevertheless, the Sanders-Clinton dustup over the Hillary Victory
    Fund, which hasraised $60.6 million
    <http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do>to be
    divvied up between the DNC and 32 state party committees, spotlights
    a type of high-dollar fundraising that is ripe for abuse and has not
    been seen since the soft-money days of the 1990s. Thanks to a 2014
    Supreme Court ruling, and to the Senate’s quiet move that same year
    to blow the lid off political party contributions, the parties are
    pocketing six- and seven-figure checks from donors—and lawmakers and
    candidates are helping them raise it.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82100&title=%26%238220%3BClinton%20Campaign%20Money%20Legal%20but%20Problematic%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Americans need a government that works for all”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82098>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:36 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82098>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Liz Kennedy in the San Diego Union-Tribune 
<http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/apr/20/kennedy-two-americas-oped-04212016/?#article-copy>:

    But the fact is that a majority of Americans support the same basic
    policies — including government action to fight income inequality
    and improve wages, to regulate banks and the financial sector, to
    make college more affordable and to deal with climate change.

    Unfortunately, wealthy and special interests keep government from
    being responsive and accountable to the people. And some politicians
    seek to hold on to political power by preventing American voters
    from exercising our authority in the voting booth. Simply put,
    Americans don’t believe that government is working for them, and
    studies confirm that government is more responsive to the policy
    preferences of the wealthiest few than the majority of Americans.

      That is not a healthy democracy; rather, it’s a corruption of our
    democracy. Because in a democracy we should all be political equals.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82098&title=%26%238220%3BAmericans%20need%20a%20government%20that%20works%20for%20all%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “California’s voter registration forms don’t make sense — it’s time
    for the state to change them” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82096>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:34 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82096>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

George Skelton 
<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-skelton-american-independent-party-20160421-story.html>in 
the LAT:

    About 400,000 Californians who might be planning to vote in the
    state’s pivotal Democratic presidential primary June 7 could be in
    for a shock.

    They’ll be told, “Sorry, your vote’s no good here.”

      They’re getting rooked, although they primarily rooked themselves.

    The state also is to blame, however. It sat back, not giving a hoot,
    and allowed this to happen. It should have been protecting the voters.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82096&title=%26%238220%3BCalifornia%26%238217%3Bs%20voter%20registration%20forms%20don%26%238217%3Bt%20make%20sense%20%26%238212%3B%20it%26%238217%3Bs%20time%20for%20the%20state%20to%20change%20them%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    “Mondello: African-American Vote Key In 9th Senate District Race;
    Vote Suppression Also Attempted” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82094>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:28 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82094>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jeff Wice blogs. 
<https://nyelectionsnews.wordpress.com/2016/04/21/mondello-african-american-vote-key-in-9th-senate-district-race-vote-suppression-also-attempted/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82094&title=%26%238220%3BMondello%3A%20African-American%20Vote%20Key%20In%209th%20Senate%20District%20Race%3B%20Vote%20Suppression%20Also%20Attempted%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Of Course The U.S. Is An ‘Oligarchy’ — We Keep Electing The Rich”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82092>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82092>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Nick Carnes 
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/of-course-the-u-s-is-an-oligarchy-we-keep-electing-the-rich>for 
TPM Cafe.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82092&title=%26%238220%3BOf%20Course%20The%20U.S.%20Is%20An%20%E2%80%98Oligarchy%E2%80%99%20%E2%80%94%20We%20Keep%20Electing%20The%20Rich%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “‘Legitimacy’: the FEC and the Press Exemption”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82090>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:26 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82090>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bob Bauer blogs 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2016/04/legitimacy-fec-press-exemption/>.

I address the press exemption at some length in “The (New) Media” 
chapter ofPlutocrats United 
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82090&title=%26%238220%3B%26%238216%3BLegitimacy%26%238217%3B%3A%20the%20FEC%20and%20the%20Press%20Exemption%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “How Bernie Sanders Raises All That Money”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82088>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:22 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82088>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Buzzfeed reports. 
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/johntemplon/how-bernie-sanders-raises-all-that-money?utm_term=.uo11E6mQd#.ifxWez0Y3>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82088&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20Bernie%20Sanders%20Raises%20All%20That%20Money%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “The Loophole That Could Cost Donald Trump the Nomination”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82086>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:18 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82086>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Nate Cohn 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/upshot/the-loophole-that-could-cost-donald-trump-the-nomination.html?_r=0>for 
NYT’s The UpShot:

    No other state leaves so many of its delegates unbound — allowed to
    vote for whomever they please at the convention. That’s because it
    conducts its loophole primary in two parts. First is the “beauty
    contest,” which is a presidential primary preference vote. The
    winner of the beauty contest gets all of Pennsylvania’s 17 at-large
    and bonus delegates.

    But the remaining 54 — the three delegates awarded to each
    congressional district — are unbound and elected in the delegate
    selection primary. In this part, voters directly elect delegates to
    the national convention. What makes Pennsylvania’s G.O.P. delegate
    selection primary so distinctive is that the ballot includes no
    guidance on whom a delegate will support at the national convention
    (the prospective Democratic delegates commit to a candidate). A
    voter will just see a list of names — some of whom might be
    recognizable, but others might as well be Joe Schmo.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82086&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Loophole%20That%20Could%20Cost%20Donald%20Trump%20the%20Nomination%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>


    “Trump campaign brings in lobbyists for key posts”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82084>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:16 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82084>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico reports. 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/trump-turns-over-his-campaign-to-lobbyists-222242>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82084&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%20campaign%20brings%20in%20lobbyists%20for%20key%20posts%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,lobbying 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>


    “RNC Delegates Should Think Twice Before Accepting Bags of Cash”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82082>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82082>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

US News reports. 
<http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-04-19/rnc-delegates-should-think-twice-before-accepting-bags-of-cash>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82082&title=%26%238220%3BRNC%20Delegates%20Should%20Think%20Twice%20Before%20Accepting%20Bags%20of%20Cash%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,political 
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>


    “$1 billion spent in 2016 presidential race — and other numbers to
    know” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82080>

Posted onApril 21, 2016 7:14 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82080>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CPI reports. 
<https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/04/21/19580/1-billion-spent-2016-presidential-race-and-other-numbers-know>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82080&title=%26%238220%3B%241%20billion%20spent%20in%202016%20presidential%20race%20%E2%80%94%20and%20other%20numbers%20to%20know%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    “Ballot Selfies: Why They Matter” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82074>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 7:41 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82074>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following is a guest post fromLindsey Cormack 
<http://personal.stevens.edu/%7Elcormack/>:

    On the morning of the New York presidential primary, Lieutenant
    Governor and former House Representative,Kathy Hochul
    <https://twitter.com/KathyHochul>did what many other excited voters
    across the state would do over the course of the day: live tweet her
    civic engagement.

    Picture1 <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Picture1.png>

    Lt. Governor Hochul started with a bike ride to her voting center.

    She then took and posted a picture of the entrance of her polling
    station.

    Picture2 <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Picture2.png>

    She then posted a picture of her blank ballot featuring candidate
    Hillary Clinton (this picture was subsequently removed). Everything
    Lt. Governor Hochul posted thus far shows support for democratic
    processes and is accordance with the law. Hochul likely tweeted the
    pictures in the hope that her constituents and followers would
    exercise their right to vote.

    And then things became a bit more complicated.

    Lt. Governor Hochul posted a picture of her ballot with the Hillary
    bubble filled out and proclaimed that she was proud to have voted
    for the former Senator.

    Picture3 <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Picture3.png>

    note: this picture was later deleted from Representative Hochul’s
    twitter account but was captured via screenshot prior to the deletion.

    This last act is a misdemeanor.

    TheNew York Elections Code
    <http://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2006/election/eln017-130_17-130.html>statue
    reads:

    17-130. Misdemeanor in relation to elections. Any person who:

    …

    10. Shows his ballot after it is prepared for voting, to any person so

    as to reveal the contents, or solicits a voter to show the same; or,

    11. Places any mark upon  his ballot,  or  does  any  other  act  in

    connection  with his ballot with the intent that it may be
    identified as the one voted by him; or,

    12. Places any mark upon, or does any other act in connection with a
        ballot  or  paster ballot,  with  the  intent that it may
        afterwards be identified as having been voted by any particular
        person; or,

    …

    is guilty  of a misdemeanor.

    Hochul, with her photo and subsequent tweet clearly violate this
    law. All of this happened within the first three opening hours of
    New York polling stations.  At 9:00 a.m. I walked into my Judicial
    Politics class, explained to the students that we have a law
    prohibiting selfies with a filled out ballot, and asked them why
    they thought such a law would exist.

    The first response was that it might allow for undue influence if
    people of notoriety did this sort of thing. Another student quickly
    chimed in to say that famous people are free to share their
    political preferences on any social media platform so that probably
    was not the reason for such a law.

    A second student offered an explanation centering on the notion of a
    voting booth as a private place, and that perhaps actions within
    that sort of environment should be kept private. When pressed
    further, it was unclear what further logic would explain why there
    would be statutes preventing self-taken photographs in a private
    space, as opposed to just statutes prohibiting someone else from
    recording what happens in a private space. At this point in the
    similarities between what happens in a voting booth and a toilet
    stall were pointed out – I will not retell the analogies but assure
    you there were many.

    After this digression we got back to thinking about why it ought be
    illegal to take a selfie featuring a completed ballot. The reason
    they came to eventually was mostly correct. If it is illegal to
    record and disseminate pictures of a completed ballot associated
    with the person responsible for completion, it is harder for people
    attempting to buy or coerce votes to follow through on threats if a
    given voter does not do the bidding they were coerced into doing.

    ProfessorRichard Hasen
    <http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/>has gone into great
    detail on the how the problematic craze of publicoversharing of
    voting details can corrupt the process
    <http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/08/17/why-the-selfie-is-a-threat-to-democracy/>.
    And while it is not likely that Lt. Governor Hochul was bought or
    coerced, it is important that citizens not work to create a norm
    that may undermine the freedoms that provide citizens with things
    like the private ballot and the awesomeness of internet-connected
    smart phones.

    Should any legal action be taken against Hochul? Probably not. Would
    it be possible for authorities to take such action? Sure, and it
    appears that she is aware of that. After questions were raised about
    potential illegality of her photo and tweet on social media, she
    removed her original post.

    Should U.S. citizens, including elected representatives in
    government be more mindful of unintended consequences of living all
    parts of life though social media? Yes. Every so often we can learn
    from an act without large immediate consequences, let us take this
    opportunity to do so.

    /Cormack is an assistant professor at Stevens Institute of
    Technology. She maintains the DCInbox project of every official
    House and Senate e-newsletter at/ *www.dcinbox.com*
    <http://t.co/VSEtdh9tgL>/./

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82074&title=%26%238220%3BBallot%20Selfies%3A%20Why%20They%20Matter%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    The Never-Decided Texas Redistricting Case Gets a New Briefing Order
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82071>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 4:22 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82071>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I don’t know if this has set a record, but this is unconscionable.

New order. 
<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/4-20-2016-SA-court-supplemental-briefing-order.pdf>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82071&title=The%20Never-Decided%20Texas%20Redistricting%20Case%20Gets%20a%20New%20Briefing%20Order&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


    “Why Voters Are Removed From The Rolls, Explained”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82069>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 11:37 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82069>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Pam Fessler reports 
<http://www.npr.org/2016/04/20/474990269/why-voters-are-removed-from-the-rolls-explained?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=politics&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews>for 
NPR.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82069&title=%26%238220%3BWhy%20Voters%20Are%20Removed%20From%20The%20Rolls%2C%20Explained%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    “What is shadow lobbying? How influence peddlers shape policy in the
    dark” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82067>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 11:12 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82067>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sunlight explainer. 
<http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2016/04/19/what-is-shadow-lobbying-how-influence-peddlers-shape-policy-in-the-dark/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82067&title=%26%238220%3BWhat%20is%20shadow%20lobbying%3F%20How%20influence%20peddlers%20shape%20policy%20in%20the%20dark%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>


    AZ: “Past Election Data Predicted High Independent Voter Turnout In
    March Election” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82065>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 11:09 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82065>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

KJZZ 
<http://kjzz.org/content/294449/past-election-data-predicted-high-independent-voter-turnout-march-election>:

    On March 22, when Maricopa County voters had to wait in line for
    hours to vote in the presidential preference election at just 60
    voting centers, Maricopa County Recorder’s Office staff said they
    were surprised by the number of independents who turned out to vote
    since only members of the Democratic, Republican or Green parties
    were allowed to participate.

    “The problem is these independent voters are showing up, and they
    are not eligible to vote in this election,” Elizabeth Bartholomew of
    the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office told/KJZZ/on election day. “So
    they’re taking time; they’re waiting in line; the poll worker has to
    explain to them why they’re not eligible to vote.”

    But while county election officials were seemingly caught off guard
    by the number of independents at the polls this year,
    a/KJZZ/analysis found that even more independents tried to vote in
    2008’s presidential preference election— the year county officials
    used as a model to predict turnout.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82065&title=AZ%3A%20%26%238220%3BPast%20Election%20Data%20Predicted%20High%20Independent%20Voter%20Turnout%20In%20March%20Election%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    There’s a Third Redistricting Lawsuit Pending in AZ
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82063>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 11:05 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82063>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Arizona’s Politics is on it. 
<http://arizonaspolitics.blogspot.com/2016/04/read-redistricting-eyes-now-turn-to.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82063&title=There%26%238217%3Bs%20a%20Third%20Redistricting%20Lawsuit%20Pending%20in%20AZ&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


    “Newly Discovered Internal Documents Reveal Group’s Lies to IRS,
    FEC” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82061>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 11:01 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82061>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CREW with the rare smoking gun 
<http://www.citizensforethics.org/blog/entry/newly-disclosed-internal-documents-reveal-groups-lies-to-irs-fec>showing 
the charade of campaign organizations pretending they are “social 
welfare groups.”

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82061&title=%26%238220%3BNewly%20Discovered%20Internal%20Documents%20Reveal%20Group%26%238217%3Bs%20Lies%20to%20IRS%2C%20FEC%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


    Image of the Day <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82059>

Posted onApril 20, 2016 9:36 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82059>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I voted 
stickers<https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1171781879522700&set=a.356817274352502.87448.100000726972171&type=3&theater>on 
Susan B. Anthony’s gravestone.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82059&title=Image%20of%20the%20Day&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
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/20160421/5eb88307/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/20160421/5eb88307/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Picture1-300x226.png
Type: image/png
Size: 95993 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160421/5eb88307/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Picture2-300x237.png
Type: image/png
Size: 139288 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160421/5eb88307/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Picture3-300x247.png
Type: image/png
Size: 77671 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160421/5eb88307/attachment-0003.png>


View list directory