[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/18/16

Thu Aug 18 08:18:04 PDT 2016

“How to Beat Extremism”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85515>
Posted on August 18, 2016 8:02 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85515> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

William Barber and Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove in The Hill<http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/291764-how-to-beat-extremism>:

When the federal appeals court in the capital of the former Confederacy struck down America’s most discriminatory voter suppression law, the judges noted that the bill passed by North Carolina’s 2013 General Assembly and signed by Governor Pat McCrory had targeted African-Americans “with near surgical precision.”

Writing for the New York Times, legal scholar Richard Hasen celebrated that, while the fight is not yet over, this landmark decision ensures fairer elections this fall, dramatically increasing the chances of a Supreme Court appointment that “will very likely seal the fate of voting rights (and much more) for a generation.”
This is no small victory. But it is more than a legal win for voting rights in our time; it is also concrete evidence that moral movement can beat extremism — a story America needs to hear during this presidential election.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85515&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20to%20Beat%20Extremism%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Trump’s Hail Mary? Win with Help of Third Party Vote<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85513>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:56 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85513> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NBC First Read:<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/first-read-one-way-trump-s-shake-makes-sense-n633436>

The reaction to the news of the latest Trump campaign shake-up has ranged from shock and disbelief to laughter. “Hiring [Breitbart’s Steve] Bannon to run the campaign in the midst of its crisis is insane,” Republican consultant Rory Cooper told NBC News<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/after-campaign-shake-it-s-trump-versus-world-n633046>. But there is one strategic way it makes sense: Team Trump views the 2016 presidential contest as a race to 40%. Under that scenario, you somehow assume that Libertarian Gary Johnson will get more than 15% of the popular vote, and that the Green Party’s Jill Stein will get more than 5%.

And then you make a play for the base to carry you across the finish line. It’s essentially the game plan that helped elect — and then re-elect — controversial Maine Gov. Paul LePage in 2010 and 2014. Of course, there’s a problem with this base play: If the 2016 presidential race is a contest to 40%, well, Hillary Clinton probably gets there first, especially with Trump’s percentage currently sitting in the 30s in many key states. And it’s doubtful that Johnson and Stein will get a combined 20%-plus of the vote; it will likely be half of that — if not less.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85513&title=Trump%26%238217%3Bs%20Hail%20Mary%3F%20Win%20with%20Help%20of%20Third%20Party%20Vote&description=>
Posted in ballot access<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, third parties<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47>

“The Courts Begin to Call Out Lawmakers”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85511>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:52 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85511> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Must-read Linda Greenhouse i<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/18/opinion/the-courts-begin-to-call-out-lawmakers.html>n NYT on courts reining in Republican legislature’s overreach:

But something has happened this summer that matters. Legislators, perhaps assuming they had friends in high judicial places, had taken bold, even flagrant steps to suppress the black vote and restrict women’s access to abortion. Judges responded, and even though their actions in some cases spoke more loudly than their words, these decisions mark a departure and make a difference. Maybe they will even begin to erase the memory of the long ago summer when the swimming pools closed to black and white alike.
 I discussed courts reacting to that overreach in the voting context here.<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/opinion/campaign-stops/turning-the-tide-on-voting-rights.html>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85511&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Courts%20Begin%20to%20Call%20Out%20Lawmakers%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Abdication and Federalism”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85509>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:45 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85509> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Justin Weinstein-Tull has posted this draft <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818702> on SSRN (forthcoming, Columbia Law Review).  Here is the abstract:
States abdicate many of their federal responsibilities to local governments. They do not monitor local compliance with those laws; they disclaim responsibility for the actions of their local governments; and they deny state officials the legal capacity to bring local governments into compliance. When sued for noncompliance with these federal laws, states attempt to evade responsibility by arguing that local governments—and not the state—are responsible. These arguments create serious and unexplored barriers to enforcing federal law. They present thorny issues of federalism and liability, and courts struggle with them. Because neither courts resolving these conflicts nor advocates litigating them are aware that abdication occurs regularly across a number of policy areas, courts have failed to develop a consistent methodology for addressing it. This Article argues that courts should reject these state arguments in most cases and outlines the contours of a “nonabdication doctrine” that would be less solicitous and accommodating of existing state laws and more attentive to the language of federal laws.

This Article is the first to uncover these state arguments and mark them as a pattern across a surprisingly diverse set of states and federal policies: indigent defense, election law, public assistance, conditions of incarceration, and others. It uses state filings—including archived documents—as well as interviews with numerous advocates and state officials, to explore the concept of state abdication. It posits that abdication is a consequence of superimposing federal responsibilities onto the diverse legal and political relationships between states and their local governments. It suggests that abdication provides a new lens through which to reassess previous thinking on localism, federalism, and decentralization. Because abdication permits states to shelter noncompliance with federal law at the local level and mutes productive local dissent, it reveals a cost to decentralizing federal policy that federalism scholars currently overlook.

[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85509&title=%26%238220%3BAbdication%20and%20Federalism%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in theory<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=41>

“How Bernie Sanders beat the clock — and avoided disclosure”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85507>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85507> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CPI:<https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/08/17/20074/how-bernie-sanders-beat-clock-and-avoided-disclosure>

As a Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Bernie Sanders<https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Bernie-Sanders> of Vermont vociferously argued for political transparency, especially when money was concerned.

Sanders insisted<https://berniesanders.com/issues/money-in-politics/>, for example, “on complete transparency regarding the funding of campaigns.” He decried<https://berniesanders.com/issues/money-in-politics/>“huge piles of undisclosed cash” benefiting candidates.

But when federal law<https://www.oge.gov/Web/OGE.nsf/Public%20Financial%20Disclosure?openview> required Sanders to reveal, by mid-May, current details of his personal finances, his campaign lawyer asked<https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/725677061084446720>the Federal Election Commission for a 45-day extension.

Request granted.

On June 30, Sanders’ campaign requested<https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/748569228828106752> a second 45-day extension, saying the senator had “good cause” to delay because of his “current campaign schedule and officeholder duties.”

Again, regulators approved<https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmNxU_ZWYAA-A3S.jpg> Sanders’ punt.

Now that Sanders’ second extension has expired, spokesman Michael Briggs confirmed to the Center for Public Integrity<http://www.publicintegrity.org/politics> that the senator won’t file a presidential campaign personal financial disclosure after all.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85507&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20Bernie%20Sanders%20beat%20the%20clock%20%E2%80%94%20and%20avoided%20disclosure%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“Trump, Taxes, and the Choice of Law or Politics”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85505>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:36 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85505> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Thanks!<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2016/08/trump-taxes-choice-law-politics/>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85505&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%2C%20Taxes%2C%20and%20the%20Choice%20of%20Law%20or%20Politics%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“NY-3: Pidot Gets His Primary”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85502>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:34 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85502> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TWC:<http://www.nystateofpolitics.com/2016/08/ny-3-pidot-gets-his-primary/>

After a protracted court battle and myriad legal motions, Republican congressional candidate Philip Pidot secured an Oct. 6 primary against state Sen. Jack Martins for a Long Island House seat.

The court ruling is an unusual one, given that it places the primary a month after state-level primaries are being held and more than three months after the June congressional primaries.

Pidot had been initially challenged for the June ballot status, with drop outs and legal decisions seemingly clearing the way for Martins to directly take on the Democratic challenger, former Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi.

But a federal court on Wednesday landed on the side of Pidot, setting the Oct. 6 primary date.

Here is the court’s order.<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Pidot-order.pdf>

[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85502&title=%26%238220%3BNY-3%3A%20Pidot%20Gets%20His%20Primary%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Voting Rights Success? Not So Fast”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85500>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:30 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85500> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Important Duell Ross NYT oped<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/18/opinion/voting-rights-success-not-so-fast.html?_r=0>:

In Texas<http://www.naacpldf.org/update/ldf-applauds-fifth-circuit-court-appeals-en-banc-decision-finding-texas-voter-id-law-discrimi>, Michigan<http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/federal_judge_stops_michigan_l.html>, North Carolina<https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiGroOTv7XOAhXBVRoKHW5OAzQQFggeMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2016%2F07%2F30%2Fus%2Ffederal-appeals-court-strikes-down-north-carolina-voter-id-provision.html&usg=AFQjCNHxBxvP2P8uUWedgGxacDZWz-5NDw&sig2=a5JVsaOgJZYro9wEOtTELQ> and elsewhere, federal courts in recent months have struck down one discriminatory voting law after another in a series of major victories for voting-rights advocates. Millions of voters, especially minorities who might have otherwise been obstructed by voter-identification requirements or shortened early voting times, will now be able to cast their ballots in the presidential election.

But these victories, though significant and hard-won, concern only major state-level voting laws. They obscure a more pernicious problem: In towns, cities and counties across the country — particularly throughout the Deep South — many discriminatory voting changes have been made at more local levels. Because officials don’t always have to give notice in advance about such changes, voters may learn of them only when they show up at the polls.

Local elections — for mayors, for members of school boards and city councils — affect such critical everyday issues as education policy and policing priorities. Consequently, local voter discrimination can have a more direct impact on the lives of minority voters than can voter discrimination in presidential elections and should worry us the most.

This is a serious problem I noted in my recent NYT oped:<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/opinion/campaign-stops/turning-the-tide-on-voting-rights.html> “States and localities<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/01/us/critics-see-efforts-to-purge-minorities-from-voter-rolls-in-new-elections-rules.html> will continue to look for ever new and creative ways to disenfranchise minorities. Voting rights groups will have to fight each change individually, without the benefits of a preclearance system that the Supreme Court wrongly eliminated in Shelby. This drive to limit the franchise and the findings of the Fourth Circuit in the North Carolina case show the fallacy of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s contention in Shelby that intentional racial discrimination in voting is a thing of the past.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85500&title=%26%238220%3BVoting%20Rights%20Success%3F%20Not%20So%20Fast%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>

“Identity thieves target Dems’ big donors after DNC hack”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85498>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:25 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85498> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico reports.<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/democratic-donors-identity-theft-cyberhack-227140>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85498&title=%26%238220%3BIdentity%20thieves%20target%20Dems%E2%80%99%20big%20donors%20after%20DNC%20hack%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

“Political Contributions and Lobbying Proposals”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85496>
Posted on August 18, 2016 7:21 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85496> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Yafit Cohn<https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2016/08/18/political-contributions-and-lobbying-proposals/> with some meaty data:

While political contributions/lobbying proposals remain prevalent, companies should be mindful that they rarely pass, regardless of whether they are supported by the proxy advisory firms. Issuers often successfully oppose political contributions/lobbying proposals, typically highlighting in their opposition statements legally mandated disclosures already in place and the additional cost of duplicating such disclosures. In determining how to respond to a shareholder proposal on political contributions and/or lobbying, companies should assess the level of disclosure, if any, that is appropriate for the company and should feel comfortable opposing the proposal if they feel it is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

The complete publication, including footnotes, is available here<http://www.stblaw.com/docs/default-source/memos/firmmemo_08_08_16_political-contributions-and-lobbying-proposals.pdf>.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85496&title=%26%238220%3BPolitical%20Contributions%20and%20Lobbying%20Proposals%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in lobbying<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>

Durham County, NC Increases Early Voting, Has College Polling Places<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85494>
Posted on August 17, 2016 6:27 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85494> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Gerry Cohen reports some welcome news<https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10103733267339148&id=2715315> for voters.

Forget the legal standard for a minute: shouldn’t we be working it make it easy and convenient for all eligible voters to cast a ballot which will be accurately counted?
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85494&title=Durham%20County%2C%20NC%20Increases%20Early%20Voting%2C%20Has%20College%20Polling%20Places&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Courts Still Sorting Out Voting Rules as Election Looms”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85492>
Posted on August 17, 2016 6:22 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85492> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bloomberg BNA:<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95970339&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0j9r9e0t3&split=0>
North Carolina asked the U.S. Supreme Court Aug. 15 to reinstate its voter identification law, which was struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last month (North Carolina v. N.C. State Conf. of the NAACP<http://src.bna.com/hLq>, U.S., No. 16A168, stay requested8/15/16).
“Mere months before a general presidential election, the Fourth Circuit has invalidated several provisions of North Carolina election law,” creating the potential for voter confusion, North Carolina said in its Supreme Court petition.
But the Tar Heel State is just one of a handful of states embroiled in litigation over the rules that will govern the rapidly approaching November election.
And while the “conventional wisdom” is that these decisions striking down voting restrictions are a win for Democrats, they may end up helping Republican nominee Donald Trump, Ohio State University Moritz College of Law election law professorDaniel P. Tokaji<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/professor/daniel-p-tokaji/>, Columbus, Ohio, told Bloomberg BNA Aug. 16.

“This is a weird election,” he said….
In particular, he noted that Trump’s success in the upcoming election might well depend on how well he can turn out less affluent, Caucasian voters.
If courts strike down these restrictions, it could provide a boon to these voters, Tokaji said.
But he said the effect likely wouldn’t be overwhelming, affecting only those voters on the margins.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85492&title=%26%238220%3BCourts%20Still%20Sorting%20Out%20Voting%20Rules%20as%20Election%20Looms%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Smoking Gun Memo Reveals GOP Voter Fraud Bamboozlement In North Carolina”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85490>
Posted on August 17, 2016 5:29 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85490> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Tierney Sneed <http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/north-carolina-early-voting-memo> for TPM.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85490&title=%26%238220%3BSmoking%20Gun%20Memo%20Reveals%20GOP%20Voter%20Fraud%20Bamboozlement%20In%20North%20Carolina%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“The Un-American Activities of Donald Trump”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85488>
Posted on August 17, 2016 2:57 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85488> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read Jamil Smith <http://www.mtv.com/news/2920490/the-un-american-activities-of-donald-trump/> at MTV News on the rigging.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85488&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Un-American%20Activities%20of%20Donald%20Trump%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Kris Kobach Wants His Disastrous Voting Restrictions Adopted In Every State”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85486>
Posted on August 17, 2016 1:07 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85486> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Right Wing Watch<http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/kris-kobach-wants-his-disastrous-voting-restrictions-adopted-every-state>:

Breitbart’s Ken Klukowski has a dispatch<http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/13/kobach-pushes-states-adopt-voter-id-laws/> from Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s latest effort to spread his innovative voter suppression policies around the country. Over the weekend, Kobach spoke at an American Civil Rights Union event at the Republican National Lawyers Association convention in Colorado, where he urged his fellow election officials and lawyers to adopt legislation modeled after a law he helped push through in Kansas.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85486&title=%26%238220%3BKris%20Kobach%20Wants%20His%20Disastrous%20Voting%20Restrictions%20Adopted%20In%20Every%20State%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

“Voter ID appeal: another Paxton waste of time”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85484>
Posted on August 17, 2016 1:06 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85484> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Fort Worth Star-Telegram editorial. <http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article96050167.html>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85484&title=%26%238220%3BVoter%20ID%20appeal%3A%20another%20Paxton%20waste%20of%20time%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Security against Election Hacking – Part 1: Software Independence”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85482>
Posted on August 17, 2016 12:28 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85482> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Andrew Appel:<https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/security-against-election-hacking-part-1-software-independence/>

So the good news is: our election system has many checks and balances so we don’t have to trust the hackable computers to tell us who won.  The biggest weaknesses are DRE paperless touchscreen voting machines used in a few states, which are completely unacceptable; and possible problems with electronic pollbooks.

In this article I’ve discussed paper trails: pollbooks, paper ballots, and per-precinct result printouts.  Election officials must work hard to assure the security of the paper trail: chain of custody of ballot boxes once the polls close, for example.  And they mustuse the paper trails to audit the election, to protect against hacked computers (and other kinds of fraud, bugs, and accidental mistakes).  Many states have laws requiring (for example) random audits of paper ballots; more states need such laws, and in all states the spirit of the laws must be followed as well as the letter.

In Part 2 of this series<https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/security-against-election-hacking-part-2-cyberoffense-is-not-the-best-cyberdefense>, I’ll discuss cybersecurity policy for election infrastructure.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85482&title=%26%238220%3BSecurity%20against%20Election%20Hacking%20%E2%80%93%20Part%201%3A%20Software%20Independence%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, voting technology<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>

“NC Republican Party seeks ‘party line changes’ to limit early voting hours”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85480>
Posted on August 17, 2016 12:13 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85480> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News and Observer:<http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article96179857.html>

Woodhouse outlines several priorities for developing new early voting schedules:

Fewer early voting opportunities: Woodhouse suggests limiting early voting hours because the sites allow voters to use same-day registration – a practice the voter ID law sought to eliminate.

“We believe same-day registration is ripe with voter fraud, or the opportunity to commit it,” he said. “Same-day registration is only available during early voting. We are under no obligation to offer more opportunities for voter fraud.”

On Monday, the Mecklenburg County elections board voted to cut<http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article95859972.html> the overall number of hours from the 2012 election by 238 – despite calls from most of the speakers at the public hearing who called for increasing hours. The board’s Republican chairwoman said she’s “not a fan of early voting.”

No Sunday voting: Sunday early voting hours have been popular among African-Americans, some of whom organize “souls to the polls” events where church members vote together after Sunday services.

Counties aren’t required to open early voting sites on Sundays, and Woodhouse lobbied against it.

“Many of our folks are angry and are opposed to Sunday voting for a host of reasons including respect for voter’s religious preferences, protection of our families and allowing the fine election staff a day off, rather than forcing them to work days on end without time off,” he wrote. “Six days of voting in one week is enough. Period.”

College campus sites unnecessary: Republican elections board members have frequently opposed opening early voting sites on college campuses, but others argue that the sites are needed because some students don’t have cars – making it difficult for them to access off-campus polling places. College students tend to be more liberal than the general population.

“No group of people are entitled to their own early voting site, including college students, who already have more voting options than most other citizens,” Woodhouse wrote to GOP election board members.
So transparent.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85480&title=%26%238220%3BNC%20Republican%20Party%20seeks%20%E2%80%98party%20line%20changes%E2%80%99%20to%20limit%20early%20voting%20hours%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“The Federalist Safeguards of Politics”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85478>
Posted on August 17, 2016 11:53 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85478> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Anthony Johnstone has posted this draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2660484> on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The Constitution’s Guarantee Clause provides “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” At a time of national political division and dysfunction the Union, as well as the Republican Form of Government itself, would be better served by letting states do more, and the United States less, to fulfill this guarantee. States do and should play as important a role as the federal government in articulating and implementing the law governing state political processes, or in formal terms, their republican forms of government. This article provides a reminder that the Guarantee Clause defines state governments by the indefinite article.

The argument has four parts. Part I introduces the basic meaning of the guarantee and its evolution through the voting rights amendments. Beyond a consensus that holds our republicanism to require basic political equality, various perfectionist conceptions of a republican form of government diverge, reflecting the essential pluralism of republican governments in a federal system. Part II explains how the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Executive are now unable to articulate, let alone implement, any workable consensus on republicanism beyond a thin conception of those basic rights. Part III describes the states as the source of persistent and important distinctions in their republican forms of government, as both legal systems and political cultures that produce and are sustained by those systems. Part IV argues these distinctions in how states articulate and implement their own versions of republicanism are crucial to efforts toward reforming republicanism at the national level. Given the unsettled visions of republicanism at the national level, and the structural autonomy the states must retain at the core of our federal system, a plurality of views on republicanism among the states is not only durable but desirable.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85478&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Federalist%20Safeguards%20of%20Politics%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

CNN Shows Some False Equivalence in Report on Trump’s Claims of Voter Fraud in Pa.<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85476>
Posted on August 17, 2016 11:50 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85476> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The video report is here<http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/08/15/pennsylvania-voter-cheating-rigged-election-foreman-dnt-erin.cnn>.

They quote Trump’s dangerous and irresponsible (and borderline racist) comments<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85282> about cheating being used to steal the election in Pa, and then when they ask if there is any evidence to support this, they point to a Pew report on bloated voter rolls, AS IF bloated voter rolls prove people are voting 5, 10, or 15 times as Trump has claimed (and as I’ve debunked<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-vote-rigging-20160816-snap-story.html>). And the story sets a false frame, by saying not—this cheating is impossible in this way, but that voter id laws discriminate against minority voters.

CNN’s on air coverage of this issue so far has been very disappointing, even though CNN’s written reporting on this and other issues has been much, much stronger.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85476&title=CNN%20Shows%20Some%20False%20Equivalence%20in%20Report%20on%20Trump%26%238217%3Bs%20Claims%20of%20Voter%20Fraud%20in%20Pa.&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Ex-CIA officer running for president will sue Texas to get on ballot”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85474>
Posted on August 17, 2016 11:29 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85474> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Texas has a very early deadlin<http://beta.dallasnews.com/news/2016-presidential-election/2016/08/16/months-deadline-independent-presidential-hopeful-willsue-texas-ballot-access>e but we are getting super late in terms of printing ballots.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85474&title=%26%238220%3BEx-CIA%20officer%20running%20for%20president%20will%20sue%20Texas%20to%20get%20on%20ballot%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in ballot access<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>

Law and Political Process Panels at APSA<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85472>
Posted on August 17, 2016 11:05 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85472> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bruce Cain and I, continuing the tradition of Dan Lowenstein, have organized two panels for the APSA meetings coming at the end of the month.  Here they are:

Buckley v. Valeo at 40: New Thinking, New Directions on Campaign Finance

Thu, September 1, 8:00 to 9:30am, Marriott, Room 414

Session Submission Type: Author meet critics

Session Description

Forty years ago, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Buckley v. Valeo, allowing some but not all limits on campaign financing in U.S. elections. In more recent years, including in the 2010 case of Citizens United v. FEC, the Court has moved in a deregulatory direction. What is the future of campaign financing in the U.S.? Do reform attempts lead to increased political polarization? Should the Court reconsider whether equality is a compelling reason for reform? This panel considers recent works and new directions in campaign finance law, including La Raja and Schaffner’s “Campaign Finance and Political Polarization,” Hasen’s “Plutocrats United,” and Drutman’s “The Business of America is Lobbying.”

With Guy Charles (chair), Rick Hasen, Ray LaRaja, Brian Schaffner, Lee Drutman, Diana Dwyre, and Joel Gora

Redistricting After Evenwel: The Prospects for One Person, One Vote

Sat, September 3, 4:00 to 5:30pm, Marriott, Room 410

Session Submission Type: Roundtable

Session Description

In Evenwel v. Abbott, the Supreme Court turned back to the question of what the “one person, one vote” rule means. Should districts be equalized on the basis of population, (registered or eligible voters) or should states have discretion in choosing the right denominator for drawing legislative and congressional districts. What are the partisan and political ramifications of the Court’s choice? How will the Court’s choice affect minority representation. This roundtable looks the the past, present, and future of the one person, one vote rule.

With Bruce Cain (chair), Joey Fishkin, Luis Fraga, Jonathan Katz, Taeku Lee, Nate Persily, and Douglas Smith
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85472&title=Law%20and%20Political%20Process%20Panels%20at%20APSA&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

#SCOTUS Cartoon of the Year<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85470>
Posted on August 17, 2016 10:59 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85470> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

in the New Yorker, via Doug Chapin<https://twitter.com/HHHElections/status/765968079687909376> (“How Future Cases Will Be Decided if There is a 4-4 Tie)
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85470&title=%23SCOTUS%20Cartoon%20of%20the%20Year&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

More on How That Scott Walker Supporter Was Caught Voting Multiple Times<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85468>
Posted on August 17, 2016 9:54 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85468> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Email from Reid Magney, public information officer of the Wisconsin Elections Commission:

I’m reading your LAT oped<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-vote-rigging-20160816-snap-story.html> in which you say:

He was easily caught, well before Wisconsin passed its strict voter ID law.

Unfortunately, things are a bit more complicated.  He was caught well after the law was passed but while it was enjoined. Here’s the details:

2011 Wisconsin Act 23 was signed by Gov. Walker on May 25, 2011.  The photo ID provisions went into effect for the February 2012 Spring Primary.  The photo ID provisions of the law were first enjoined in March 2012.  According to the Journal-Sentinel:

Monroe cast two ballots in the April 2011 Supreme Court election, two in the August 2011 recall election of state Sen. Alberta Darling, five in the recall election of Gov. Scott Walker, one illegal ballot in an August 2012 primary and two ballots in the November 2012 presidential election.

I don’t know exactly when Monroe was “caught,” but charges were not filed until June 2014.  I think it would be more correct to say the crimes were committed in elections both before the photo ID law was in effect and during the time it was enjoined by the courts.  However, he also voted in Indiana using his driver license in November 2012, where that state’s law was in effect. I do not know whether Indiana ever pursued prosecution.

I’m also not sure how “easily” Monroe was caught, since investigators and prosecutors used DNA evidence from absentee ballot envelopes to prove it was he who sealed them rather than the voters he was impersonating. This earlier story discussed the DNA evidence: http://archive.jsonline.com/news/crime/shorewood-man-charged-with-13-counts-of-voter-fraud-b99297733z1-264322221.html.

Wisconsin has an excellent system designed to identify multiple registration and voting by the same person, which is how authorities first became aware of a suspicious absentee ballot request in the name of Monroe’s son in law. But it sounds like the case quickly became more complicated, crossing multiple jurisdictions and even involving a John Doe proceeding.

 I appreciate the clarification and information!
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85468&title=More%20on%20How%20That%20Scott%20Walker%20Supporter%20Was%20Caught%20Voting%20Multiple%20Times&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

6th Circuit Denies Stay in MI Straight-Ticket Voting Case; MI to Go En Banc<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85466>
Posted on August 17, 2016 9:43 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85466> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Gerstein<http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/08/straight-ticket-voting-michigan-court-ruling-227114>:

Procedures allowing Michigan voters to easily cast straight-ticket ballots look likely to remain in place for this fall’s election after a federal appeals court refused to restore a law that would have ended the practice.

A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion<http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000156-9930-d2af-af76-9bb77f150001> Wednesday declining the state’s request to overturn a judge’s order finding that the straight-ticket voting option was heavily relied on by African-Americans and that the state’s attempt to ban it appears to violate both the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.

The dispute over the 2015 Michigan ban is one of numerous battles being fought out in federal courts over election-law changes that could affect the outcome of contests on the ballot this November.

The appeals court ruling did not slam the door on Michigan’s efforts to end straight-ticket voting, but the judges said the state presented no evidence in the lower court to rebut experts who claimed that ending the practice could dissuade voters by lengthening lines and creating confusion, especially in heavily black communities….

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, a Republican, plans to ask the full bench of the 6th Circuit to issue a stay that would restore the law ending straight-ticket voting.

“Michigan is no different than the 40 other states that have eliminated straight ticket voting. We will continue to defend the laws of the State of Michigan and plan to file an emergency appeal to the 6th Circuit for an en banc review by the full court,” Schuette said in a statement.

Gilman issued a concurring opinion noting that some briefs filed in the case dismissed the experts’ conclusions as junk science, but he said state officials had not sought to counter those claims with evidence at the preliminary stage of the suit.

[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85466&title=6th%20Circuit%20Denies%20Stay%20in%20MI%20Straight-Ticket%20Voting%20Case%3B%20MI%20to%20Go%20En%20Banc&description=>
Posted in ballot access<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Trump recruiting ‘election observers’ to scout for fraud”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85464>
Posted on August 17, 2016 9:20 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85464> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

FOX News:<http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/17/trump-recruiting-election-observers-to-scout-for-fraud.html>

But considering the tensions that already have flared outside Trump rallies to date, the possibility of vigilant Trump volunteers looking for voting irregularities has some analysts and officials warning about the implications for Election Day.

“It sounds more like voter intimidation than observation,” Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who specializes in election law, told FoxNews.com.

Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp said he welcomes the monitors but warned, “We don’t want anyone getting unruly,” according to The Washington Post<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-warns-of-election-cheating-as-he-fires-up-recruitment-of-poll-watchers/2016/08/13/cac7223c-617f-11e6-8e45-477372e89d78_story.html>.

A group of GOP lawyers also reportedly is planning an anti-voter fraud effort that includes hundreds of observers on the ground and on call on Election Day.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85464&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%20recruiting%20%26%238216%3Belection%20observers%26%238217%3B%20to%20scout%20for%20fraud%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

Not Every Day You See One FEC Commissioner Attack Another (Actually It is…But Not Usually in Print Like This)<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85462>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:58 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85462> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

FEC Commissioner Caroline Hunter <http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/16/fec-commissioner-its-not-my-role-to-apply-constitutional-principles/> in the Daily Caller:

Commissioner Ann Ravel’s tenure on the Federal Election Commission has been marked by a progression from foolishness to nihilism as to the role of the agency, the importance of the First Amendment, and the role of the courts in interpreting the law.  Criticism isn’t unusual coming from me, a Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, as I often disagree with my Democratic-leaning colleagues on how best to interpret and apply campaign finance law.  But her recent remarks and actions are a symptom of an accelerating devolution: Commissioner Ravel was recently quoted inThe Washington Post as saying that her “role in the Commission is not to apply constitutional principles” because she’s “not on the Supreme Court.”  The fact that Commissioner Ravel said this while explaining her vote to censor a news organization for hosting a candidate debate would be troubling even if it weren’t part of a disturbing trend.

Wow.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85462&title=Not%20Every%20Day%20You%20See%20One%20FEC%20Commissioner%20Attack%20Another%20(Actually%20It%20is%26%238230%3BBut%20Not%20Usually%20in%20Print%20Like%20This)&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>

“Electoral Integrity in Campaign Finance Law”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85460>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:55 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85460> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Daniel Wiener and Benjamin Brickner have posted this draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2824750> on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

In their dissenting opinion in McCutcheon v. FEC in 2014, four justices of the U.S. Supreme Court described the government’s interest in passing campaign finance laws in terms of “electoral integrity.” But while they referenced the concept and made clear its importance, the dissenters did not fully flesh out what it might mean for this area of law. With the makeup of the Court poised to change, the answer to this question could have broad implications for the Court’s future jurisprudence.

Drawing upon existing case law and our broader constitutional tradition, this Article highlights four criteria for judging whether elections have integrity with particular relevance to money in politics: representation, participation, competition, and information. The Article goes on to consider the impact that adopting these criteria would have on the viability of a range of policies, including contribution and spending limits, public financing, and disclosure. Although electoral integrity would not be a silver bullet to settle the many constitutional questions such measures implicate, taking it seriously as a government interest would still fundamentally reshape the Court’s approach to campaign finance in a more realistic, factually-grounded direction.

Part I of this Article explores the concept of electoral integrity in the Court’s jurisprudence, highlighting the extent to which it is a value rooted in the First Amendment, not antagonistic to it. Part II sets forth key criteria for judging electoral integrity that have particular relevance for campaign finance jurisprudence. Part III discusses how courts might apply such criteria in specific cases, including how they might use record evidence and other factual materials to answer key questions about how the political system actually functions. Part IV briefly addresses several hard doctrinal issues that would remain, and considers how the Court might think about these questions consistent with the broader approach outlined here.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85460&title=%26%238220%3BElectoral%20Integrity%20in%20Campaign%20Finance%20Law%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

That NC GOP Official Claiming Early Voting Leads to Voter Fraud? Sent to County Boards of Elections!<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85458>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:32 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85458> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Dumb!<http://blog.wataugawatch.net/2016/08/gop-leadership-in-raleigh-gave-marching.html?m=1>

(my earlier post on this)<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85420>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85458&title=That%20NC%20GOP%20Official%20Claiming%20Early%20Voting%20Leads%20to%20Voter%20Fraud%3F%20Sent%20to%20County%20Boards%20of%20Elections!&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Make No Mistake: The Koch Brothers Are Helping Donald Trump”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85456>
Posted on August 17, 2016 8:28 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85456> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TAP:<http://prospect.org/article/make-no-mistake-koch-brothers-are-helping-donald-trump#.V7R-zrG1evI.twitter>

It’s no secret that the Koch brothers really don’t like Donald Trump. In political media, much has been made of the fact that Charles and David Koch, the neolibertarian principals of Koch Industries and overseers of a secretive network of deep-pocketed political donors, declined to dedicate the resources of the many advocacy organizations they have seeded in this year’s presidential contest. David Koch, a Republican Party delegate, even managed to miss attending the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

But don’t think for a minute that the superrich siblings, who together are worth some $82 billion, according to Forbes, aren’t helping Donald Trump. They may not wish to get all of that Trumpy dirt—the calls to violence, the obvious racism and misogyny, the invitation to Russia for cyberespionage on his own country—on their manicured hands, but they’re keen to turn out the voters needed to maintain Republican control of both houses of Congress. And there’s no way to turn out those voters without helping the quisling from Queens.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D85456&title=%26%238220%3BMake%20No%20Mistake%3A%20The%20Koch%20Brothers%20Are%20Helping%20Donald%20Trump%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

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>

--
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/20160818/8954c6e5/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/20160818/8954c6e5/attachment.png>