[EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/28/16

Thu Jul 28 08:37:08 PDT 2016

Wasserman Shultz Couldn’t Get VP Biden to Her Daughter’s Bat Mitzvah but Got a Video Message Consolation Prize<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84658>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:34 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84658> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-debbie-wasserman-schultz-226352> is about what you would have expected.

And DWS has been keeping it classy:

Wasserman Schultz, meanwhile, has remained in Philadelphia, attending events day and night with her police escort, and having her assistant reach out aggressively to donors, urging them to see her in her suite at the Wells Fargo Center, her base while in town.

She hasn’t seen DNC staffers since she stopped by their meeting of shaken staff Sunday night, within hours of Obama calling her to accept her resignation.

“And all those scumbags who are giving you shit on social media,” she concluded, according to several attendees “f— them, they don’t know the first thing. They don’t know you.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84658&title=Wasserman%20Shultz%20Couldn%26%238217%3Bt%20Get%20VP%20Biden%20to%20Her%20Daughter%26%238217%3Bs%20Bat%20Mitzvah%20but%20Got%20a%20Video%20Message%20Consolation%20Prize&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Is D.N.C. Email Hacker a Person or a Russian Front? Experts Aren’t Sure”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84656>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:29 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84656> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/is-dnc-email-hacker-a-person-or-a-russian-front-experts-arent-sure.html?ref=politics>:

Who is Guccifer 2.0, the self-proclaimed Romanian “lone hacker” responsible for copying thousands of emails and other files from the Democratic National Committee — a real person, or a front created by Russian intelligence officials?

Technology specialists have been debating that question since June 15, when CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm hired by the Democratic National Committee,announced<https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/> that sophisticated hacker groups with Russian links were responsible forbreaching the committee’s computer servers<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/us/politics/russian-hackers-dnc-trump.html>. Within hours of the announcement, someone using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 started a blog to mock that finding, posting several of the stolen documents and claiming sole credit<https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/dnc/>.

But the publication by WikiLeaks of an archive of the committee’s internal emails — and the uproar they caused on the eve of the Democratic National Convention — have focused wider attention on who, or what, is operating behind that name. While WikiLeaks has not said how it obtained the emails, Guccifer 2.0 claimed in a blog post last month to have sent them to WikiLeaks.

Cybersecurity specialists have pointed to an array of forensic and technical evidence<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/world/europe/russia-dnc-hack-emails.html?_r=0>suggesting that Guccifer 2.0 might not be a Romanian as claimed. That evidence included metadata hidden in the early documents indicating that they were edited on a computer with Russian language settings. American intelligence officials believe that Guccifer 2.0 is a front for the G.R.U., Russia’s military intelligence service, according to federal officials<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/spy-agency-consensus-grows-that-russia-hacked-dnc.html?ref=topics>briefed on the investigation.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84656&title=%26%238220%3BIs%20D.N.C.%20Email%20Hacker%20a%20Person%20or%20a%20Russian%20Front%3F%20Experts%20Aren%E2%80%99t%20Sure%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

“After Lying Low, Deep-Pocketed Clinton Donors Return to the Fore”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84654>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:28 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84654> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT reports.<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donors.html?ref=politics>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84654&title=%26%238220%3BAfter%20Lying%20Low%2C%20Deep-Pocketed%20Clinton%20Donors%20Return%20to%20the%20Fore%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“Todd Rokita: A look back on a decade of Voter ID”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84652>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:26 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84652> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Reflections of a huckster<http://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/op-ed-columns/4082951-todd-rokita-look-back-decade-voter-id>.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84652&title=%26%238220%3BTodd%20Rokita%3A%20A%20look%20back%20on%20a%20decade%20of%20Voter%20ID%26%238221%3B&description=>

Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

Ohio Voter Purge Case to 6th Circuit<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84650>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:22 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84650> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Cincinnati Enquirer<http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/07/27/ohio-court-fight-over-voter-purge-voter-registration/87623294/>:

The three 6th Circuit judges quizzed both sides about the case Wednesday, but they could take weeks to make a decision.

Judges Eugene Siler Jr. and Julia Smith Gibbons were appointed by presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, respectively. Judge Eric Clay was appointed by President Bill Clinton.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84650&title=Ohio%20Voter%20Purge%20Case%20to%206th%20Circuit&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, NVRA (motor voter)<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>

“How elected officials exploit a campaign finance loophole to raise big piles of cash”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84648>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:19 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84648> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Kyle Whitmire <http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/07/how_elected_officials_exploit.html#incart_river_index> for AL.com.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84648&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20elected%20officials%20exploit%20a%20campaign%20finance%20loophole%20to%20raise%20big%20piles%20of%20cash%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Jesse Jackson: We Need a Right-to-Vote Amendment”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84646>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:15 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84646> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT letter to the editor.<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/opinion/jesse-jackson-we-need-a-right-to-vote-amendment.html?_r=0>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84646&title=%26%238220%3BJesse%20Jackson%3A%20We%20Need%20a%20Right-to-Vote%20Amendment%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in voting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>

Gora in Adler’s Business and the Roberts Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84644>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:13 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84644> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jonathan Adler has edited this volume<https://global.oup.com/academic/product/business-and-the-roberts-court-9780199859344?cc=us&lang=en&> for OUP which has a great lineup of writers. Among them is one of my favorites (though we often disagree), Joel Gora, who wrote a chapter on the Roberts Court and Citizens United. Here is the abstract for Joel’s chapter:

The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision is perhaps the Roberts Court’s most well-known and controversial ruling .  It has been criticized and, indeed, condemned, by the President of the United States on down.  It is also cited as Exhibit A for the proposition that the Roberts Court has been a relentlessly pro-business institution in its key decisions.  In this chapter of a book entitled Business and the Roberts Court, I contend that both the criticism of the decision and of the Court is wrong. In my view,Citizens United is a decision which embodied and applied classic First Amendment principles.   In doing so, the Court freed labor unions, non-profit organizations and, yes, business corporations, from unwarranted restraints on their ability to speak on behalf of their members, supporters, shareholders and adherents. In protecting free speech and political freedom, the landmark decision was part of a larger Roberts Court pattern of deregulatory rulings, not just in the campaign finance area, but in a number of First Amendment contexts far removed from that area. Indeed, many of the Court’s rulings manifest a strongly libertarian caste to them with a pervading theme that where free speech is concerned, it is the people, not the government, who get to decide what form and content that speech will take. In the end, the Citizens Uniteddecision, embodying these principles, reflects the work not of a pro-business Court, but of a pro-free speech Court.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84644&title=Gora%20in%20Adler%26%238217%3Bs%20Business%20and%20the%20Roberts%20Court&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“George Soros Rises Again”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84642>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:09 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84642> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico<http://www.politico.eu/article/george-soros-rises-again-democratic-national-convention-hillary-clinton-funding/>:

George Soros is back.

The billionaire investor, who scaled back his political giving after a then-unprecedented $27 million spending spree to try to defeat George Bush in 2004, has quietly reemerged as a leading funder of Democratic politics — and as aleading bogeyman<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/14/beware-the-george-soros-zombies/> of conservatives.

Soros has donated or committed more than $25 million to boost Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates and causes, according to Federal Election Commission records and interviews with his associates and Democratic fundraising operatives. And some of his associates say they expect Soros, who amassed a fortune estimated at $24.9 billion<http://www.forbes.com/profile/george-soros/> through risky currency trades, to give even more as Election Day nears.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84642&title=%26%238220%3BGeorge%20Soros%20Rises%20Again%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“Ten Ideas to Make Politics Less Rotten”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84640>
Posted on July 28, 2016 8:05 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84640> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Freakonomics podcast.<http://freakonomics.com/podcast/idea-must-die-election-edition/>

[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84640&title=%26%238220%3BTen%20Ideas%20to%20Make%20Politics%20Less%20Rotten%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in alternative voting systems<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>

Baude on Tillman on Meaning of “Officer” in the Constitution<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84638>
Posted on July 28, 2016 7:58 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84638> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jotwell<http://conlaw.jotwell.com/constitutional-officers-a-very-close-reading/>:

Next time you confront a separation of powers problem or read through parts of the Constitution, keep Professor Tillman’s chart in hand. Suddenly, it will be hard to assume that the Constitution’s textual variations are meaningless. Indeed, Professor Tillman’s theory makes sense of patterns that most of us never saw. It brings order out of chaos. That is not to say that his position has been conclusively proven. But at this point, I think he has singlehandedly shifted the burden of proof.

Since this is an entry in the Journal of Things We Like Lots, and since I am synthesizing much of Professor Tillman’s work here, I feel the need to venture a final word on his research style. When you read an individual Tillman piece, you will notice exceedingly technical arguments combined with an almost urgent voice. You cannot help but think the author is brilliant, and you cannot help but wonder if the author is rather eccentric. As you read more of the pieces together, you will realize that he has a constitutionalproject, that he pursues it with great skill and knowledge, and that if he didn’t do it, nobody would.

We need more scholars like Seth Barrett Tillman.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84638&title=Baude%20on%20Tillman%20on%20Meaning%20of%20%26%238220%3BOfficer%26%238221%3B%20in%20the%20Constitution&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Lobbyists Celebrate Democratic Party’s New Embrace at Convention”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84636>
Posted on July 27, 2016 3:39 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84636> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TIME reports.<http://time.com/4425343/dnc-hillary-clinton-lobbyists-donations/>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84636&title=%26%238220%3BLobbyists%20Celebrate%20Democratic%20Party%E2%80%99s%20New%20Embrace%20at%20Convention%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, lobbying<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>

“New Docs Show Florida Official Didn’t Hesitate To Yank Poll Site From Mosque”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84634>
Posted on July 27, 2016 12:31 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84634> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/documents-susan-bucher-poll-site-islamic-center-boca-raton?utm_content=buffer0c226&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer>:

The documents show that around June 25, voters in precinct 4170 received cards informing them that their polling site had been changed to the Islamic center due to redistricting. Some then contacted Bucher to express their dismay.

“This is truly not a neutral place,” read one email from a local resident. “As a history major, to have people not of islamic faith in the building makes those people enemies, at the very least to the fanatics [sic].”…

“We are going to put together a team of protesters and Reporters on this if you can’t secure a better location that is not such a controversial place for such disturbing times over Islam and IsIs … I [sic] asking you as republican and a Christian to find a non-discriminate location,” the voter wrote.

[http://a5.img.talkingpointsmemo.com/image/upload/w_652/klnwvp4uwc6sxxl2hxyn.jpg]

Bucher forwarded that particular email to her staff a few hours later with a note asking them to look into an alternate site.

“Looks like this is becoming a bigger problem than I thought,” she wrote. “Can we see if there is anywhere else we can move to.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84634&title=%26%238220%3BNew%20Docs%20Show%20Florida%20Official%20Didn%26%238217%3Bt%20Hesitate%20To%20Yank%20Poll%20Site%20From%20Mosque%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“By November, Russian hackers could target voting machines”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84632>
Posted on July 27, 2016 12:29 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84632> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bruce Schneier<https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/27/by-november-russian-hackers-could-target-voting-machines/>:

Over the years, more and more states have moved to electronic voting machines and have flirted with Internet voting. These systems are<http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/04/meet-the-e-voting-machine-so-easy-to-hack-it-will-take-your-breath-away/> insecure<https://www.statslife.org.uk/significance/politics/2288-how-trustworthy-are-electronic-voting-systems-in-the-us> and<https://www.salon.com/2011/09/27/votinghack/> vulnerable<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/15/virginia-hacking-voting-machines-security> to<http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/08/31/foreigners-could-hack-us-elections-experts-say/> attack<http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2012-11/how-i-hacked-electronic-voting-machine>.

But while computer security experts like me<https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wit.html> have sounded<https://www.giac.org/paper/gsec/3687/inherent-problems-electronic-voting-systems/105962> the<http://homepage.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/congress.html> alarm<https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/2006-07/electronic-voting/index_files/page0004.html> for<https://citp.princeton.edu/research/voting/> many years, states have largely ignored the threat, and the machine manufacturers have thrown up enough obfuscatory babble that election officials are largely mollified.

We no longer<https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xlp1/v/t1.0-9/12115815_699872940152206_2266030088084252627_n.png?oh=2a4e5e944a5feadb7e133dd8c57be376&oe=57AD8C92> have time<https://xkcd.com/463/> for that. We must ignore the machine manufacturers’ spurious claims<https://www.salon.com/2006/09/13/diebold_3/> of security, create tiger teams to test the machines’ and systems’ resistance to attack, drastically increase their cyber-defenses and take them offline if we can’t guarantee their security online.

Longer term, we need to return to election systems that are secure from manipulation. This means voting machines with voter-verified paper audit trails<http://votingmachines.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000291>, andno<http://engineering.jhu.edu/magazine/2016/06/internet-voting-nonstarter/> Internet<https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/internet-voting/vote-online/> voting<http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=2012-presidential-election-electronic-voting>. I know it’s slower and less convenient to stick to the old-fashioned way, but the security risks are simply too great.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84632&title=%26%238220%3BBy%20November%2C%20Russian%20hackers%20could%20target%20voting%20machines%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Kansas House candidate seeks grand jury investigation into Kobach”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84630>
Posted on July 27, 2016 12:27 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84630> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Wichita Eagle<http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article92136447.html>:

A candidate for the Kansas House wants to convene a grand jury to investigate Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

Steven X. Davis, a Democratic candidate for the Kansas House from Lawrence, filed a petition with the Douglas Country District Court to summon a grand jury to investigate whether the secretary of state’s office committed election fraud in 2014.

Davis, who is challenging incumbent Rep. Barbara Ballard, D-Lawrence, in House District 44, said the secretary of state’s office may have intentionally failed to register voters who had tried to register through the state’s online system during the last election, even if they provided proof of citizenship documents as required by Kansas law.

Kobach, in an e-mail, called the request for a grand jury “a ridiculous political stunt by an unknown candidate who’s trying to get his name in the paper” and noted that “county clerks count the ballots and process 99% of voter registration applications, not the secretary of state.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84630&title=%26%238220%3BKansas%20House%20candidate%20seeks%20grand%20jury%20investigation%20into%20Kobach%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

“Donald Trump Challenges Russia to Find Hillary Clinton’s Missing Emails”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84625>
Posted on July 27, 2016 9:13 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84625> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0>:

Donald J. Trump<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/donald-trump-on-the-issues.html?inline=nyt-per> said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/hillary-clinton-on-the-issues.html?inline=nyt-per>’s email, essentially sanctioning a foreign power’s cyberspying of a secretary of state’s correspondence.
 “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras. “I think you will probably be mightily rewarded by our press.”

Mr. Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the U.S. presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-emails.html?_r=1> of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which researchers have concluded was likely the work of two Russian intelligence agencies.

Later in the news conference, when asked if he was really urging a foreign nation to hack into the private email server of Mrs. Clinton, or a least meddle in the nation’s elections, he dismissed the question. “That’s up to the president,” Mr. Trump said, before finally telling the female questioner to “be quiet — let the president talk to them.”
 Glenn Thrush<https://twitter.com/GlennThrush/status/758331348838998017>: “Inciting a foreign power to commit a felony on US soil is an interesting development in a U.S. presidential campaign IMHO.”
I’ve tweeted some thoughts<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/758331039055884288> on this very disturbing development.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84625&title=%26%238220%3BDonald%20Trump%20Challenges%20Russia%20to%20Find%20Hillary%20Clinton%E2%80%99s%20Missing%20Emails%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

Unique and Important “Case Study” Database of Emergency Election Litigation Created by Federal Judicial Center<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84619>
Posted on July 27, 2016 7:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84619> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Back in 2012, I first noted<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=40759> this resource under development. This database<http://www.fjc.gov/public/home.nsf/autoframe?openagent&url_l=/public/home.nsf/inavgeneral?openpage&url_r=/public/home.nsf/pages/1570> at the Federal Judicial Center has now grown to over 340 cases, and is a treasure trove of data. For some of the cases, it gives some information not available elsewhere, such as a judge’s reasoning not in any written opinion but contained only in a transcript.

Here’s another example, from the write-up<http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/EE-AZ-2-06-cv-1268-Gonzalez.pdf/$file/EE-AZ-2-06-cv-1268-Gonzalez.pdf> on the Purcell v. Gonzalez case (which is the origin of the controversial Purcell Principle<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2545676> on timing of emergency election litigation).  One of the issues in the case is that the district court denied a request for a preliminary injunction of Arizona’s voter id law, pending a trial on the merits, without immediately giving written reasons for denying the stay. Plaintiffs then sought a stay from the Ninth Circuit, which issued the stay of the law, also without giving reasons. The case ended up at the Supreme Court with the Court reversing the Ninth Circuit, which criticized the courrts for not giving reasons.

Here’s a very fascinating tidbit from the write up:

On September 11, Judge Silver declined to interfere with the next day’s primary election and denied the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction.17 She issued findings of fact and conclusions of law on October 12.18 On interlocutory appeal, however, a motions panel of the court of appeals enjoined application of proposition 200 on October 5.19 The Supreme Court vacated the injunction on October 20.20 In its per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court scolded the district court for not providing the court of appeals with findings of fact and conclusions of law more promptly: “These findings were important because resolution of legal questions in the Court of Appeals required evaluation of underlying factual issues.”21

Following a tradition in the Ninth Circuit, where district judges are encouraged to bring misunderstandings to the attention of appellate judges, Judge Silver wrote the Chief Justice in an effort to explain the difficulties of striking a balance between quick action and a complete record.22 (my emphasis)

Wow.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84619&title=Unique%20and%20Important%20%E2%80%9CCase%20Study%E2%80%9D%20Database%20of%20Emergency%20Election%20Litigation%20Created%20by%20Federal%20Judicial%20Center&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“Perkins Coie’s Myriad Roles Raise DNC Conflict Questions”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84617>
Posted on July 27, 2016 7:25 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84617> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Law.com reports.<http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2016/07/26/perkins-coies-myriad-roles-raise-dnc-conflict-questions/?slreturn=20160627102221>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84617&title=%26%238220%3BPerkins%20Coie%26%238217%3Bs%20Myriad%20Roles%20Raise%20DNC%20Conflict%20Questions%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, election law biz<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>

“DNC sought to hide details of Clinton funding deal”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84615>
Posted on July 27, 2016 7:21 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84615> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Vogel:<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-leak-clinton-team-deflected-state-cash-concerns-226191>

But the emails show that officials and lawyers at the DNC and the Clinton campaign became frantic after POLITICO’s May 2 story, which led to substantial<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/sanders-clinton-dnc-fundraising/480951/> follow-up<http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/02/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-fundraising/>coverage<http://www.vox.com/2016/5/5/11581024/bernie-sanders-money-laundering-clinton> that put the Clinton campaign and the DNC on the defensive. It led the Sanders campaign to accuse the Clinton campaign of “money laundering<https://berniesanders.com/press-release/politico-exposes-clinton-campaign-money-laundering-scheme/>” and prompted Politifact to downgrade its rating<http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/may/05/george-clooney/george-clooney-decries-big-money-politics-says-mos/> — from “mostly true” to “half true” — of the claim that the bulk of the money collected by the victory fund would go to down-ballot Democrats.

“The DNC should push back DIRECTLY at Sanders and say that what he is saying is false and harmful to the Democratic party,” Marc Elias, an attorney who advises the DNC and the Clinton campaign, wrote in an email<https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6291> to DNC officials.

CEO Amy Dacey responded “I do think there is too much of this narrative out there — I also worry since they are emailing to their list (which has overlap with ours!)”

In another email, Miranda, the communications director, suggested that the campaign tell other journalists seeking to follow POLITICO’s story that “Politico got it wrong<https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4091>.” But the rest of his email failed to indicate any errors in POLITICO’s story, nor did the DNC or the Clinton campaign seek a correction.

[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84615&title=%26%238220%3BDNC%20sought%20to%20hide%20details%20of%20Clinton%20funding%20deal%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Gianforte Wants ‘Misleading’ Campaign Ads Pulled”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84613>
Posted on July 27, 2016 7:18 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84613> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Montana Public Radio<http://mtpr.org/post/gianforte-wants-misleading-campaign-ads-pulled#stream/0>:

Republican candidate for governor Greg Gianforte<http://mtpr.org/term/greg-gianforte> is pressuring local TV stations to stop running an ad that he says falsely calls him “a millionaire from New Jersey.”

Earlier this month, Gianforte’s attorneys sent a cease-and-desist letter to Montana broadcasters calling on stations to refuse to air what they call a false and misleading advertisement.

Here is the cease and desist letter <http://mtcowgirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Gianforte-Cease-and-Desist-Letter-07.08.2016.pdf> written by James Bopp, who successfully challenged Montana’s truth in campaigning law as a First Amendment violation.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84613&title=%26%238220%3BGianforte%20Wants%20%26%238216%3BMisleading%26%238217%3B%20Campaign%20Ads%20Pulled%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

--
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/20160728/9ede0814/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/20160728/9ede0814/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 51871 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160728/9ede0814/attachment.jpg>