[EL] ELB News and Commentary 2/13/16

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Feb 23 08:00:01 PST 2016


    "Trial begins on lawsuit challenging Virginia voter ID law”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80241>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:58 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80241>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Richmond Times-Dispatch 
<http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/ap/article_14830fb5-5d1f-58f9-bda8-01bcfc2f83f3.html>:

    A 69-year-old black woman who grew up in a small, segregated city
    wept on the witness stand Monday as she testified about the trouble
    she had voting in 2014 because she could not comply with Virginia’s
    voter identification law.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80241&title=%26%238220%3BTrial%20begins%20on%20lawsuit%20challenging%20Virginia%20voter%20ID%20law%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>


    “Univision Aims to Make Hispanic Voting Bloc Even More Formidable”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80239>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:55 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80239>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/univision-hispanic-voting.html?ref=politics&_r=0>:

    The company, including its top-rated Spanish-language network and
    many subsidiaries, is making an ambitious nationwide effort aimed at
    registering about three million new Latino voters this year, roughly
    the same number who have come of voting age since 2012. The
    initiative will entail an aggressive schedule of advertisements on
    all of Univision’s video and digital platforms, including 126 local
    television and radio stations and the sports channelUnivision
    Deportes <http://www.univision.com/deportes>. Station managers will
    exhort their audiences in old-fashioned editorials, a comprehensive
    online voter guide will be updated throughout the election season,
    and the media company will use the kinds of grass-roots organizing
    events usually staged by candidates — town-hall-style forums and
    telephone banks — to try to turn its viewers into even more of a
    powerhouse voting bloc than it already is.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80239&title=%26%238220%3BUnivision%20Aims%20to%20Make%20Hispanic%20Voting%20Bloc%20Even%20More%20Formidable%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    EAC Republican Chair and Newby Oppose Preliminary Injunction in
    Citizenship Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80237>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:47 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80237>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

There will be 
<http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2016/02/LWV20v.20Newby20letter20to20court.pdf>no 
kumbaya moment at the reconstituted EAC.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80237&title=EAC%20Republican%20Chair%20and%20Newby%20Oppose%20Preliminary%20Injunction%20in%20Citizenship%20Case&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    “Trump trashes ‘dangerous’ caucus system”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80235>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:45 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80235>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico reports. 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/donald-trump-nevada-caucuses-219654?lo=ap_b3>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80235&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%20trashes%20%26%238216%3Bdangerous%26%238217%3B%20caucus%20system%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>


    “Donald Trump warns owners of Chicago Cubs ‘better be careful’ after
    funding campaign against him” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80233>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:40 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80233>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A Nixonian threa 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/02/22/donald-trump-warns-owners-of-chicago-cubs-better-be-careful-after-funding-campaign-against-him/>t 
to use the power of government against a political opponent.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80233&title=%26%238220%3BDonald%20Trump%20warns%20owners%20of%20Chicago%20Cubs%20%E2%80%98better%20be%20careful%E2%80%99%20after%20funding%20campaign%20against%20him%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


    “Kansas Republicans hold to hard-right stance; ACLU and League of
    Women Voters ‘communists,’ Kobach says”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80231>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:37 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80231>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Red-baiting 
<http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/feb/20/kansas-republicans-hold-hard-right-agenda/>from 
one of our least favorite members of the fraudulent fraud squad.

Despicable.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80231&title=%26%238220%3BKansas%20Republicans%20hold%20to%20hard-right%20stance%3B%20ACLU%20and%20League%20of%20Women%20Voters%20%26%238216%3Bcommunists%2C%26%238217%3B%20Kobach%20says%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


    “Election Law – Today and Beyond” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80229>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:34 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80229>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Check outthe election law symposium 
<http://washburnlaw.edu/practicalexperience/government/center/programs/electionlaw/>coming 
to Washburn on Thursday.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80229&title=%26%238220%3BElection%20Law%20%26%238211%3B%20Today%20and%20Beyond%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpedagogy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=23>


    “Without Justice Scalia, ‘Corruption’ Cases May Get Hazier”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80227>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:33 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80227>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Steve Klein blogs 
<https://www.pillaroflaw.org/index.php/blog/entry/without-justice-scalia-corruption-cases-may-get-hazier>, 
with a focus on McDonnell.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80227&title=%26%238220%3BWithout%20Justice%20Scalia%2C%20%26%238216%3BCorruption%26%238217%3B%20Cases%20May%20Get%20Hazier%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,chicanery 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Justice Scalia and Campaign Finance: A Puzzle (Part II)”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80225>

Posted onFebruary 23, 2016 7:31 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80225>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bauer 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2016/02/justice-scalia-campaign-finance-puzzle-part-ii/>:

    How did Justice Scalia come towrite a dissent
    <http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2016/02/justice-scalia-campaign-finance-one-puzzle/>as
    he did in/McIntrye/, insisting on the role of disclosure and relying
    for the power of his point on the need to follow the judgment of
    legislators in protecting or enhancing the electoral process?  The
    question this raises is not whether Scalia was or was not a
    conservative on this issue, but what/kind/of conservative he was. As
    it happens, the explanation also sheds light on the recent history
    of campaign finance reform and the Court’s response.  The emphasis
    here is on “response”, for the Court—and the Justice
    Scalia—responded to developments in the law, and in political
    practice, from/Buckley/onward, and his position may be fully
    understandable only within this context.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80225&title=%26%238220%3BJustice%20Scalia%20and%20Campaign%20Finance%3A%20A%20Puzzle%20%28Part%20II%29%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “How Jeb Bush Spent $130 Million Running for President With Nothing
    to Show for It” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80223>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 6:54 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80223>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT breaks it down 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/jeb-bush-campaign.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80223&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20Jeb%20Bush%20Spent%20%24130%20Million%20Running%20for%20President%20With%20Nothing%20to%20Show%20for%20It%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


    #Plutocrats United Miami Law Event March 1
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80221>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:53 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80221>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Details now posted. 
<http://media.law.miami.edu/communications/email-blast/2016/030116-plutocrats-united-book.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80221&title=%23Plutocrats%20United%20Miami%20Law%20Event%20March%201&description=>
Posted inPlutocrats United <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>


    Watch Ed Whelan and Me Hash it Out on #SCOTUS and the 2016 Elections
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80217>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:50 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80217>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Moderated by the excellent Henry Weinstein.

Video. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL-Qx7WWVQA>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80217&title=Watch%20Ed%20Whelan%20and%20Me%20Hash%20it%20Out%20on%20%23SCOTUS%20and%20the%202016%20Elections&description=>
Posted inSupreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “The Role of Partisan Advantage in North Carolina’s Redistricting
    Map” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80215>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:39 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80215>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Michael Parsons 
<https://www.scribd.com/doc/300070550/The-Role-of-Partisan-Advantage-in-North-Carolina-s-Redistricting-Map>:

    In North Carolina, the legislature is attempting to justify a map
    with a 10-3 split, which does not reasonably reflect statewide voter
    preference, based on an alleged state interest in political
    advantage. For reasons I discuss at length in myarticle, I do not
    believe partisan advantage is a legitimate state interest. (Can/the
    State itself/be said to have an interest in electing Democrats or
    Republicans? Could the State proffer an interest in “partisan
    advantage,” rather than “preventing voter fraud” or “electoral
    integrity,” to justify voter identification laws in court?)

    In fact, if any redistricting plan were to tee up this issue, North
    Carolina’s proposed map would seem to be it. Under the subtle header
    “Partisan Advantage,” the State’s Joint Select Committee on
    Congressional Redistrictingadopted districting criteriathat
    expressly state: “The partisan makeup of the congressional
    delegation under the enacted plan is 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats.
    The Committee shall make reasonable efforts . . . to maintain the
    current partisan makeup of North Carolina’s congressional
    delegation.” Even more pointedly, the criteria state that
    “[d]ivision of counties shall only be made for reasons of equalizing
    population, consideration of incumbency and political impact.”

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80215&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Role%20of%20Partisan%20Advantage%20in%20North%20Carolina%26%238217%3Bs%20Redistricting%20Map%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


    “Neutral Principles and Some Campaign Finance Problems”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80213>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:36 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80213>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

John McGinnis has postedthis draft 
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2733768>on SSRN 
(forthcoming, /William and Mary Law Review/). Here is the abstract:

    This Article has both positive and normative objectives. As a
    positive matter, it shows that the Roberts Court’s campaign finance
    regulation jurisprudence can be best explained as a systematic
    effort to integrate that case law with the rest of the First
    Amendment, making the neutral principles refined in other social
    contexts govern this more politically salient one as well. It
    demonstrates that the typical Roberts Court majority in campaign
    finance cases follows precedent, doctrine, and traditional First
    Amendment theory, while the dissents tend to carve out exceptions at
    all these levels.

    As a normative matter it argues that following neutral principles is
    particularly important in the application of the First Amendment to
    campaign finance for three reasons. First, campaign finance disputes
    bear directly on the political process that determines substantive
    results across the entire legislative policy space, making the
    danger of political decision making particularly high. Second, the
    First Amendment itself reflects a distrust of government officials,
    and the more a constitutional provision reflects an economy of
    distrust, the more it requires judicial constraint, which adherence
    to neutral principles can provide. Third, given that politicians
    have much to gain from skewing campaign finance regulations in their
    favor and judges are appointed by politicians, neutral principles
    help avoid partisanship and the appearance of partisanship in
    judicial decision making.

    Finally, the Article confronts the most important arguments for
    departing from standard First Amendment principles in campaign
    finance and demonstrates that they have far-reaching implications
    because they would allow the legislature to regulate the press or
    even academics because of their disproportionate influence in
    politics. But it also shows that, even taken on their own terms, the
    proposals for judicial reform of First Amendment law in the campaign
    finance area are deeply flawed. In particular, the idea that the
    Constitution permits legislators to restrict the freedom of speech
    for fear it will distort their decision making has no basis in the
    Constitution. The Constitution provides no baseline for judging
    distortion, and indeed, its structure permits legislators to take
    into account the information generated by the First Amendment’s
    spontaneous order of freedom rather than follow raw popular sentiment.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80213&title=%26%238220%3BNeutral%20Principles%20and%20Some%20Campaign%20Finance%20Problems%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Department of Justice disowns EAC director’s move on proof of
    citizenship for voters” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80211>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:20 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80211>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Zack Roth 
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/department-justice-disowns-eac-directors-move-proof-citizenship-voters>:

    Also in the filing, Newby said in a sworn deposition that he decided
    to change the form after receiving a list of non-citizens who had
    “recently” registered to vote in Kansas. The list was sent by Kansas
    Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who was requesting the change. Newby
    said in the deposition that after receiving the list from Kobach, “I
    began developing a point of view that previous decisions by the EAC
    might have been wrong.”

    In fact, the list
    <http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Documents/Newby%20Ltr%2011-19-2015.pdf>, from
    Kansas’ Sedgwick County, showed that seven non-citizens registered
    in the decade before the state’s proof of citizenship law went into
    effect in 2013. And it showed that 11 non-citizens had been stopped
    from registering since then, though it’s unclear whether the law was
    responsible. Meanwhile, voting rights groups have said over 40,000
    registrations have been thrown out or suspended because of the law.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80211&title=%26%238220%3BDepartment%20of%20Justice%20disowns%20EAC%20director%E2%80%99s%20move%20on%20proof%20of%20citizenship%20for%20voters%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Election Assistance Commission 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34>


    “Brexit: Corporate Communications And UK Election Laws”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80209>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:06 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80209>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Borden, Brown, and Butland 
<https://www.aohub.com/aohub/publications/brexit-corporate-communications-and-uk-election-laws?nav=FRbANEucS95NMLRN47z%2BeeOgEFCt8EGQ71hKXzqW2Ec%3D&key=BcJlhLtdCv6%2FJTDZxvL23TQa3JHL2AIGr93BnQjo2SkGJpG9xDX7S2thDpAQsCconWHAwe6cJTkL%0D%0ACvGiRZRaa6oOPiGX4nYV>:

    Later this year, British and Northern Irish voters will go to the
    polls to decide whether or not to remain in the European Union. This
    important decision could have significant consequences for the
    British economy and firms that do business in the U.K., so it is not
    surprising that U.K. firms and multinational companies are
    increasingly voicing their opinion on what has been dubbed “Brexit.”
    Communicating about the referendum, however, can implicate U.K.
    campaign finance laws, and the campaign finance rules that apply to
    the Brexit referendum differ from both equivalent U.S. regimes and
    from the rules that apply during other U.K. elections.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80209&title=%26%238220%3BBrexit%3A%20Corporate%20Communications%20And%20UK%20Election%20Laws%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,comparative election law 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=107>


    “Sheldon Adelson and the missing $100 million”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80207>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:03 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80207>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Must-read Politico 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/sheldon-adelson-donor-republicans-219598>:

    It’s one of the biggest mysteries in Republican circles: why has
    Sheldon Adelson ― whospent upwards of $100 million
    <http://www.politico.com/story/2012/09/sheldon-adelson-inside-the-mind-of-the-mega-donor-081588>during
    the last presidential campaign ― suddenly stopped pouring huge sums
    of money into politics?

    The conventional wisdom ― that he’s planning to spend millions of
    dollars to support Marco Rubio, but is waiting to see how he fares
    in a few more primaries ― does not explain the severity of Adelson’s
    political spending freeze, which is further-reaching than previously
    known.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80207&title=%26%238220%3BSheldon%20Adelson%20and%20the%20missing%20%24100%20million%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Judge seems skeptical of call to block voter proof-of-citizenship
    requirement” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80205>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 4:02 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80205>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Gerstein 
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/02/voting-rights-citizenship-proof-219642>:

    A federal judge sounded skeptical Monday about a request from voting
    and civil rights’ groups to block a federal official’s decision to
    embrace requirements in three states that new voters submit proof
    that they’re U.S. citizens.

    During a 90-minute hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon
    repeatedly asked about past and upcoming registration deadlines in
    Alabama, Georgia and Kansas, suggested that the parties who brought
    suit earlier this month may have acted too slowly and seemed focused
    on the fact that only a small percentage of voters register in any
    given year….

    Kobach also argued that the 2014 decision by the then-director of
    the election panel was essentially ghost written by lawyers in the
    Civil Rights Divison of the Justice Department. “It appears the
    Department of Justice decided they were going to take the helm at
    this unmanned ship and commandeer it,” he said.

    The letter from Newby and a current commissioner suggested that that
    DOJ was so involved in writing that 2014 decision that the
    department had a conflict of interest in deciding whether to defend
    Newby’s contrary action.

    Justice Department lawyer Galen Thorp said that didn’t create a
    concern for the department.

    “We believe there is no conflict,” he said.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80205&title=%26%238220%3BJudge%20seems%20skeptical%20of%20call%20to%20block%20voter%20proof-of-citizenship%20requirement%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Election Assistance Commission 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    “Feds back court ban on proof of citizenship for voter registration”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80200>

Posted onFebruary 22, 2016 9:10 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=80200>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Josh Gerstein 
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/02/feds-back-court-ban-on-proof-of-citizenship-for-voter-registration-219618>:

    In an unusual move, the Obama Administration is backing the issuance
    of a court injunction blocking a federal official’s decision to
    approve new voter registration forms that allow three states to
    insist that voters provide copies of documents proving their U.S.
    citizenship.

    Inlegal papers filed Monday morning
    <http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000153-09c8-de04-af73-cfcb7e040001>, the
    Justice Department urged U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon to
    grant a preliminary injunction sought by the League of Women Voters
    aimed at preventing Kansas, Alabama and Georgia from using so-called
    “motor voter” forms that require proof of citizenship.

The unusual filing (in which adefendant consents 
<https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/701815856104345601>to 
preliminary injunction against it) begins:

    The United States consents to plaintiffs’ request for entry of a
    preliminary injunction. On January 29, 2016, the Executive Director
    of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (“Commission”) approved
    the requests of three states—Alabama, Georgia, and Kansas—to modify
    their state-specific instructions on the National Mail Voter
    Registration Form (“Federal Form”). However, in deciding to include
    the states’ documentary proof of citizenship requirements on the
    Federal Form, the Executive Director did not make the determination
    that this information was “necessary to enable the appropriate State
    election official to assess the eligibility of the applicant and to
    administer voter registration and other parts of the election
    process.” 52 U.S.C. § 20508. Because the National Voter Registration
    Act permits only information satisfying this “necessity” requirement
    to be included on the Federal Form, the Executive Director’s
    decisions are not consistent with the statute. While plaintiffs have
    made a number of other arguments, the Court need not reach them in
    order to issue an injunction. The United States requests that the
    decisions be enjoined on this narrow ground.

Update: The end of the filing has a very interesting declaration from ED 
Brian Newby.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D80200&title=%26%238220%3BFeds%20back%20court%20ban%20on%20proof%20of%20citizenship%20for%20voter%20registration%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,Election Assistance Commission 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=34>,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
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/20160223/fb8c7559/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/20160223/fb8c7559/attachment.png>


View list directory