[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/17/16

[Rick Hasen]

Trump is Threatening to Rig the Election<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85454>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:16 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85454> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

My definition of election rigging in my LAT oped<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-vote-rigging-20160816-snap-story.html>:

An election is rigged when eligible voters are prevented from voting, when some voters can vote multiple times, when ineligible voters are allowed to vote, or when vote totals are changed, all with an intent to affect an election outcome.

Who is doing it?

Maybe Trump is bluffing too, but his words are dangerous and his actions are irresponsible. By claiming the vote is rigged, he undermines the public’s confidence in the election results. And by exhorting his supporters to show up at the polls to look for rigging in “certain sections” of battleground states, he is encouraging behavior that could prevent eligible voters from casting their ballots. If anyone is trying to rig the vote, it’s Trump.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85454&title=Trump%20is%20Threatening%20to%20Rig%20the%20Election&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“U.S. offers states help to fight election hacking”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85452>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:07 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85452> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Reuters reports.<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-cybersecurity-idUSKCN10R1QN>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85452&title=%26%238220%3BU.S.%20offers%20states%20help%20to%20fight%20election%20hacking%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“The more outside money politicians take, the less well they represent their constituents”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85450>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85450> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Anne Baker<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/08/17/members-of-congress-follow-the-money-not-the-voters-heres-the-evidence/> for The Monkey Cage.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85450&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20more%20outside%20money%20politicians%20take%2C%20the%20less%20well%20they%20represent%20their%20constituents%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Judicial Rebellion Against Voter ID”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85448>
Posted on August 17, 2016 7:57 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85448> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Wow<http://www.libertylawsite.org/2016/08/15/judicial-rebellion-against-voter-id/> Mark Pulliam sees the world through a very different lens than I do. He calls the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, arguably the most conservative appellate court in the nation, full of “unruly schoolchildren” and full of “enough results-oriented Obama appointees to tip the balance in close cases.”

I see.  When liberal judges make decisions it is result-oriented and when conservative judges like Edith Jones do so it is principled neutral decisionmaking.  Go read Judge Jones opinion and let me know if this sounds like neutral decisionmaking.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85448&title=%26%238220%3BJudicial%20Rebellion%20Against%20Voter%20ID%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Judge Dismisses Challenge to State’s Voter ID Law”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85446>
Posted on August 17, 2016 7:49 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85446> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Oklahoma Watch<http://oklahomawatch.org/2016/08/16/judge-dismisses-challenge-to-states-voter-id-law/?platform=hootsuite>:

A more than four-year legal challenge to overturn Oklahoma’s voter identification law was rejected earlier this week by a state district court judge who upheld the constitutionality of the measure.

Oklahoma County District Court Judge Aletia Haynes Timmons dismissed the case Monday after hearing arguments from lawyers representing the Oklahoma State Election Board and Tulsa resident Delilah Christine Gentges. Gentges’ attorney said he plans to appeal the decision….

Oklahoma’s law is somewhat less strict. It allows voters with an ID to request a provisional ballot and prove their identity by signing a sworn affidavit. Their ballot is automatically verified later by election workers.

Lawyers for the state argued the law allows voters to cast a ballot without placing an undue burden on those who don’t have a valid ID or choose not to show one. The state also pointed out that every registered voter is given a free voter identification card that satisfies the requirements of the law.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85446&title=%26%238220%3BJudge%20Dismisses%20Challenge%20to%20State%E2%80%99s%20Voter%20ID%20Law%26%238221%3B&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>

“Trump Calls On Supporters To Monitor Polling Places On Election Day”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85444>
Posted on August 17, 2016 7:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85444> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Pam Fessler reports<http://www.npr.org/2016/08/15/490112586/trump-calls-on-supporters-to-monitor-polling-places-on-election-day> for NPR.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85444&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%20Calls%20On%20Supporters%20To%20Monitor%20Polling%20Places%20On%20Election%20Day%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Pro-Trump Super PAC Hire Tests Federal Election Rules”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85442>
Posted on August 17, 2016 7:35 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85442> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

MapLight:<http://maplight.org/content/pro-trump-super-pac-hire-tests-federal-election-rules>

The Trump campaign announced in April it had hired<https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-announces-expansion-of-campaign-delegate-team> Ken McKay as a senior adviser, saying he would “support our delegate operations team and bolster our ground game efforts.” McKay left the Trump campaign in early June to join Rebuilding America Now. When the move was announced, a number of media outlets, including CNN<http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/tom-barrack-donald-trump-super-pac/> and theWall Street Journal<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/06/07/whos-who-meet-the-super-pacs-backing-donald-trump/>, reported that McKay would have to go through a 120-day “cooling off” period before working with the super PAC, under federal elections rules.

That didn’t happen. Rebuilding America Now began paying<http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/186/201607169020674186/201607169020674186.pdf> McKay for “political strategy consulting” only days after it wasreported<http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/tom-barrack-donald-trump-super-pac/> that he was leaving the Trump campaign, according to the group’s filing with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The super PAC paid McKay $60,000 in June. As Rebuilding America Now’s political director<http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000156-2eff-db8a-a57f-6efff89c0001>, McKay has<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/videos/2016-07-21/pro-trump-super-pac-announces-first-advertising-push> frequently<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/21/trump-reverses-his-opposition-to-super-pacs-and-is-now-willing-to-headline-events-for-a-big-money-group/>discussed<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/05/pro-trump-super-pac-set-to-launch-new-ad-hitting-clinton/> his group’s messaging and advertising strategy with the media.

When MapLight asked Rebuilding America Now on Monday why McKay did not wait before starting to work with the super PAC, the group’s spokesperson, Melissa Stone, responded that McKay was a volunteer for the Trump campaign.

“Ken McKay volunteered to help pre-convention operations for a few weeks, but he was never paid by the Trump campaign. Rebuilding America Now works to ensure compliance within all respects of the law,” Stone said, before asserting that Hillary Clinton’s campaign is “peddling falsehoods to reporters” about her group.

Under the FEC’s “cooling off” rule<http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/indexp.shtml>, a super PAC is prohibited from making communications in support of a candidate based on a former campaign staffer’s knowledge of the candidate’s plans, strategies or needs, within 120 days of the staffer leaving a campaign. Lawyers at two campaign finance watchdog groups say the rule may apply to McKay’s work with the super PAC regardless of whether he was paid.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85442&title=%26%238220%3BPro-Trump%20Super%20PAC%20Hire%20Tests%20Federal%20Election%20Rules%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“Charles Koch’s network launches new fight to keep donors secret”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85440>
Posted on August 17, 2016 7:32 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85440> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Fredreka Schouten<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2016/08/16/charles-koch-network-launches-new-fight-keep-donors-secret/88824694/> for USA Today:

A group tied to billionaire Charles Koch has unleashed an aggressive campaign to kill a ballot measure in South Dakota that would require Koch-affiliated groups and others like them to reveal their donors’ identities — part of a sustained effort by his powerful network to keep government agencies and the public from learning more about its financial backers.

Americans for Prosperity, the largest activist group in the policy and political empire founded by industrialist Koch and his brother, David, launched a coalition this year to fight Initiated Measure 22, which calls for public disclosure of donors who fund advocacy efforts, the creation of a state ethics commission and public financing of political campaigns. It also limits lobbyists’ gifts to elected officials and lowers the amount of campaign contributions to candidates, parties and political action committees.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85440&title=%26%238220%3BCharles%20Koch%26%238217%3Bs%20network%20launches%20new%20fight%20to%20keep%20donors%20secret%26%238221%3B&description=>

Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law and election law<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>

Kaine on Effects of NC Voter ID Law<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85430>
Posted on August 16, 2016 7:50 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85430> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WBTV<http://www.wbtv.com/story/32765848/exclusive-democratic-vp-candidate-tim-kaine-discusses-voter-id-jobs-plan>:

Kaine’s criticism came during an exclusive interview with WBTV following at rally in Asheville Monday night aimed at highlighting the jobs plan recently unveiled by the Clinton campaign.

The Democratic senator from Virginia, who once worked as a civil rights attorney, doubled down a claim made during a recent campaign stop in Greensboro that the recent 4th Circuit ruling overturning the voter ID law could lead to as many as 100,000 additional voters turning out to the polls in November.

When asked where the 100,000 figure came from, Kaine said it was a figure being used across the state. A campaign spokesman later pointed to an estimate from the NAACP and Democracy N.C. that at least 100,000 more North Carolina residents would be eligible to vote as a result of the voter ID law being overturned.

I think nailing such numbers down is very difficult—but also misses the point. The question is why the state should be able to burden voters’ rights for no good reason—or, in the case of North Carolina, for a racially discriminatory purpose.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85430&title=Kaine%20on%20Effects%20of%20NC%20Voter%20ID%20Law&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>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“No election reform is perfect, but ranked-choice voting can restore civility, majority rule”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85428>
Posted on August 16, 2016 5:37 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85428> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sandy Maisel oped<http://bangordailynews.com/2016/08/16/opinion/contributors/no-election-reform-is-perfect-but-ranked-choice-voting-can-restore-civility-majority-rule/> in Maine.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85428&title=%26%238220%3BNo%20election%20reform%20is%20perfect%2C%20but%20ranked-choice%20voting%20can%20restore%20civility%2C%20majority%20rule%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in alternative voting systems<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>

“Supreme Court stance on North Carolina law to send signal on voting limits”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85425>
Posted on August 16, 2016 3:31 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85425> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Lawrence Hurley reports<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-election-idUSKCN10R290> for Reuters.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85425&title=%26%238220%3BSupreme%20Court%20stance%20on%20North%20Carolina%20law%20to%20send%20signal%20on%20voting%20limits%26%238221%3B&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>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

A Shift on Early Voting and Voter Fraud in NC<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85420>
Posted on August 16, 2016 3:11 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85420> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I’ve heard a number of defenses for cutbacks in early voting and elsewhere, such as, it’s the state’s prerogative to set these hours (and if Democrats can add them why can’t Republicans cut them?), that voting too early means you get more uninformed voters, that it is an administrative hassle, even that voting should not be too easy because hard rules weed out uninformed voters (I critique that argument here<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/02/the_new_conservative_assault_on_early_voting_more_republicans_fewer_voters.html>).

What you don’t usually hear is that early voting limits are necessary to prevent voter fraud. And that’s because early voting in person usually as the same safeguards (or more safeguards) than voting in person, with the additional period of time to check out any cases of ineligible voters.

But note that the NC GOP is now trying to mobilize GOP voters to work for cutbacks in early voting to prevent voter fraud.  From Gerry Cohen<https://twitter.com/gercohen/status/765667455083700224>:

Just got this, supposedly from NC GOP Exec Dir Dallas Woidhouse

[creen Shot 2016-08-16 at 3.10.45 PM]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-08-16-at-3.10.45-PM.png>[creen Shot 2016-08-16 at 3.11.12 PM]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-08-16-at-3.11.12-PM.png>



This is the kind of stuff that may get North Carolina under federal supervision for voting again.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85420&title=A%20Shift%20on%20Early%20Voting%20and%20Voter%20Fraud%20in%20NC&description=>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Federal court blocks Texas law restricting language assistance to voters”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85418>
Posted on August 16, 2016 3:03 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85418> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:<http://aaldef.org/press-releases/press-release/federal-court-blocks-texas-law-restricting-language-assistance-to-voters.html>

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) applauded a federal court order blocking the Texas law that limits access to interpreters for limited English proficient voters. The district court ruled that the Texas law, which requires interpreters to be registered voters, violates the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which protects the right of voters to select persons of their choice to assist them at the polls.

Jerry Vattamala, AALDEF Democracy Program Director, said: “This is a great victory for Asian American voters and all LEP voters across the state of Texas. The federal court recognized that Asian Americans still face barriers at the polls and that Texas had restricted their right to language assistance. We look forward to seeing improvements in the state’s compliance with federal law when we conduct our Asian American exit poll in the November presidential election.”

In his 21-page opinion<http://aaldef.org/OCAHoustonvTX.pdf> in OCA-Houston v. State of Texas, federal district judge Robert Pitman granted AALDEF’s motion for summary judgment and enjoined the “Interpretation Provisions” of Texas Election Code 61.033, which “flatly contradict Section 208” of the VRA by “arbitrarily requiring the interpreter to be registered to vote in the county where assistance is being sought.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85418&title=%26%238220%3BFederal%20court%20blocks%20Texas%20law%20restricting%20language%20assistance%20to%20voters%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


“Mecklenburg Early Voting Plan Could Be A Gift For GOP”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85416>
Posted on August 16, 2016 2:49 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85416> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Michael Bitzer:<http://wfae.org/post/mecklenburg-early-voting-plan-could-be-gift-gop>

On the day that the state of North Carolina asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the 4th Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision regarding the state’svoting law changes<http://wfae.org/post/nc-early-voting-plans-flux-depending-where-you-live>, especially voter identification and early voting, Mecklenburg County’s Board of Elections, on a 2-1 partisan vote, voted<http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article95843437.html> to cut 238 hours from early voting….

Based on this data, those in Mecklenburg County who used early, in-person absentee voting more than the county average were registered Democrats, old voters, and black voters. Two<http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/NC/president/> of those three groups—registered Democrats and black voters (who were 34 percent of the total county votes cast)—are reliably Democratic voters, while older voters (who were 13 percent of the total Mecklenburg votes cast) were 2-1 Republican<http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/NC/president/>voters.

Since the Mecklenburg County Board of Elections vote wasn’t unanimous, it’s up to the state Board of Elections to officially set the early-voting hours. Assuming the state board keeps the early voting hours in place, the 238-hour reduction will likely disproportionately affect different groups of voters. And it looks like it will impact more Democratic voters than Republicans.

And perhaps that’s what the majority GOP Mecklenburg County Board of Elections wanted for the state’s second<http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=08-13-2016> largest county of voters.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85416&title=%26%238220%3BMecklenburg%20Early%20Voting%20Plan%20Could%20Be%20A%20Gift%20For%20GOP%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


Breaking: CJ Roberts Asks Plaintiffs in NC Voting Case to File a Reponse at #SCOTUS<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85413>
Posted on August 16, 2016 2:17 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85413> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A response to application (16A168) has been requested by Chief Justice Roberts. The response is due Thursday, August 25 by 4 p.m. ET.

I think the state’s chances of prevailing here are small.<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85336>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85413&title=Breaking%3A%20CJ%20Roberts%20Asks%20Plaintiffs%20in%20NC%20Voting%20Case%20to%20File%20a%20Reponse%20at%20%23SCOTUS&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>


--
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>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160817/a2d35e02/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/20160817/a2d35e02/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 82858 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160817/a2d35e02/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 112140 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160817/a2d35e02/attachment-0002.png>