[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/20/16
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Fri May 20 08:42:33 PDT 2016
Journalism Works Dept: LA Times Story on American Independent Party
Gets Results <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82952>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:39 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82952>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
LAT:
<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-american-independent-voters-registration-20160520-snap-story.html>
A new analysis finds nearly 32,000 voters in California’s American
Independent Party changed their official registration and left the
party in the two weeks after a Los Angeles Times investigation
identified widespread confusion among the party’s members.
The change comes after a series of stories last month aboutvoters
who had intended to be politically independent
<http://static.latimes.com/american-independent-party-california-voters/>,
what’s known in California as having “no party preference.” A poll
conducted for The Times found 73% of American Independent Party
members did not know they had registered with an actual political party.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82952&title=Journalism%20Works%20Dept%3A%20LA%20Times%20Story%20on%20American%20Independent%20Party%20Gets%20Results&description=>
Posted inballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>,third
parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47>
“Voters’ clashing options: speed executions or abolish them”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82950>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:36 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82950>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bob Egelko
<http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Opposing-death-penalty-measures-may-await-Ca-7746300.php>for
the SF Chronicle:
Prosecutors, law enforcement groups and victims’-rights advocates
turned in 593,000 signatures for the initiative, which would attempt
to fix a system plagued by delays and high costs by tightening legal
deadlines and requiring more lawyers to take capital cases. Last
month, opponents of the death penalty submitted 601,000 signatures
for an initiative to repeal capital punishment and replace it with
life in prison without parole. Each measure needs 365,880 valid
signatures to qualify for the ballot.
A recent Field poll indicated that Californians were closely
divided, with 48 percent in favor of speeding up executions and 47
percent preferring to eliminate them. If both measures win majority
votes, a provision in the pro-death penalty initiative says only the
one receiving more votes would become law. That has been the rule
for conflicting ballot measures in the past, but a leader of the
campaign to abolish the death penalty argues that a majority vote
for the repeal measure would override any vote for the rival proposal.
“If we repeal the death penalty, they (supporters of the speedup
measure) will be modifying procedures for a policy that no longer
exists,” said Quintin Mecke, deputy campaign manager for the repeal
initiative.
But an expert on election laws said he thinks the courts will uphold
whichever measure passes by a higher majority.
“The usual rule is, if they’re in conflict, the one that gets more
votes would be the winner,” saidRick Hasen
<http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Rick+Hasen%22>,
a UC Irvine law professor. State courts have focused on whether two
ballot measures are actually in conflict, he said, and “I don’t see
how you can both speed up something and abolish it.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82950&title=%26%238220%3BVoters%E2%80%99%20clashing%20options%3A%20speed%20executions%20or%20abolish%20them%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted indirect democracy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>
“In federal court, Wisconsin DMV administrator outlines challenges
in issuing free voter IDs” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82947>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:27 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82947>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Cap Times:
<http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/election-matters/in-federal-court-wisconsin-dmv-administrator-outlines-challenges-in-issuing/article_a50898a8-7bd0-5f2f-9020-fa8465fe043c.html>
People who die waiting for a state-issued voter ID are recorded as a
“customer-initiated cancellation” by the state Department of Motor
Vehicles, a DMV official testified Thursday.
On the fourth day of atrial challenging a series of voting changes
implemented in Wisconsin since 2011
<http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/election-matters/former-republican-staffer-names-wisconsin-senators-who-were-giddy-about/article_36985a7f-f76d-5c39-9aab-8d896bdc5c55.html>,
U.S. District Judge James Peterson heard testimony from a University
of Wisconsin-Madison professor and Sun Prairie’s city clerk. But
lawyers focused on Susan Schilz, a supervisor in the DMV’s
compliance, audit and fraud unit, who was questioned for several hours.
Schilz’s unit oversees the ID petition process, or IDPP — the system
qualified voters use to obtain a free ID from the state.
The lawsuit,filed about a year ago
<http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/voting-rights-advocates-sue-wisconsin-gab-over-election-policies/article_5899776b-73ac-54c0-8e4c-787e624b593d.html>,
argues the IDPP is ineffective and is failing minority groups in
particular.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82947&title=%26%238220%3BIn%20federal%20court%2C%20Wisconsin%20DMV%20administrator%20outlines%20challenges%20in%20issuing%20free%20voter%20IDs%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>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Univision draws 100,000 to voter registration drives in move to
increase its political clout” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82945>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:25 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82945>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WaPo reports.
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/05/20/univision-draws-100000-to-voter-registration-drives-in-move-to-increase-its-political-clout/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82945&title=%26%238220%3BUnivision%20draws%20100%2C000%20to%20voter%20registration%20drives%20in%20move%20to%20increase%20its%20political%20clout%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
“Eyeing Senate, Clinton directing money to 2016 battlegrounds”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82943>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:21 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82943>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP reports.
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/5b30b97a7406469ca28cf04a14089a4e/eyeing-senate-clinton-directing-money-2016-battlegrounds?platform=hootsuite>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82943&title=%26%238220%3BEyeing%20Senate%2C%20Clinton%20directing%20money%20to%202016%20battlegrounds%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“G.O.P. Donors Shift Focus From Top of Ticket to Senate Races”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82941>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:19 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82941>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT reports.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/politics/republican-donors-trump-senate-house.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82941&title=%26%238220%3BG.O.P.%20Donors%20Shift%20Focus%20From%20Top%20of%20Ticket%20to%20Senate%20Races%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Do preregistration laws improve voter turnout among young adults ?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82939>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:15 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82939>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Journalist’s Resource
<http://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/citizen-action/voter-turnout-registration-teen-youth>:
But how well do preregistration programs work? Do teens who register
to vote actually participate in elections once they turn 18? Two
scholars from Duke University,John B. Holbein
<https://sanford.duke.edu/people/student/holbein-john>andD. Sunshine
Hillygus <http://sites.duke.edu/hillygus/>, looked into the issue
for their 2016 study, “Making Young Voters: The Impact of
Preregistration on Youth Turnout,
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12177/abstract>” published
in the/American Journal of Political Science/. Holbein and Hillygus
tried to gauge the impact of preregistration by analyzing data
collected through the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Current
Population Survey for 2000–2012. They also examined preregistration
and voting trends in Florida, which, in 1990, became the first state
to implement a preregistration law. The study defines young voters
as those between the ages of 18 and 22.
Among the study’s findings:
* Preregistration increases the probability that young voters will
participate in elections. The probability that youth will vote
increases in states with preregistration laws by an average of 2
percentage points to 13 percentage points, depending on the
model the authors used for their analysis.
* In Florida specifically, preregistering increases turnout by 3
percent to 14 percent.
* The impact of preregistration is similar for young Democrats and
young Republicans. Preregistration raised voter turnout by about
7.6 percentage points among young Democrats and 7.4 percentage
points among young Republicans.
* The impact of preregistration is similar for men and women and
for white voters and minority voters. Preregistration raised
voter turnout by about 7.3 percentage points among males and 7.4
percentage points among females. It raised voter turnout by
about 7.6 percentage points among white voters and 8 percentage
points among minorities.
Update: Here’san earlier study
<http://www.nyujlpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Michael-P.-McDonald-Matthew-Thornburg-Registering-the-Youth-Through-Voter-Preregistration.pdf>reaching
similar conclusions from Michael MacDonald and Matthew Thornburg.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82939&title=%26%238220%3BDo%20preregistration%20laws%20improve%20voter%20turnout%20among%20young%20adults%20%3F%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted invoting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>
“Eskridge’s Interpreting Law: A Primer on How to Read Statutes and
the Constitution” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82936>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:06 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82936>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here’sa new treatise
<http://www.westacademic.com/Professors/ProductDetails.aspx?NSIID=77485>every
Legislation scholar will need.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82936&title=%26%238220%3BEskridge%26%238217%3Bs%20Interpreting%20Law%3A%20A%20Primer%20on%20How%20to%20Read%20Statutes%20and%20the%20Constitution%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Here’s how a wealthy Trump supporter could give $783,400 to support
his campaign and the RNC” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82934>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:04 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82934>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Matea Gold for WaPo.
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/19/heres-how-a-wealthy-trump-supporter-could-give-783400-to-support-his-campaign-and-the-rnc/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82934&title=%26%238220%3BHere%E2%80%99s%20how%20a%20wealthy%20Trump%20supporter%20could%20give%20%24783%2C400%20to%20support%20his%20campaign%20and%20the%20RNC%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
Not Sure NYT OpEd Correction on Corporate Political Spending is
Correct <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82932>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 8:01 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82932>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
On May 11 I wrote: <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82681>
Yesterday I flaggedthis NYT oped
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/10/opinion/why-dark-money-is-bad-business.html?ref=opinion&_r=1>by Kathleen
Donovan-Maher and Steven Groopman, “Why Dark Money is Bad Business.”
The second sentence reads: “So far two-thirds of election dollars
have largely come from anonymous corporate donations, funneled
through what have been referred to as “dark money” nonprofit groups
that freely engage in electoral and legislative politics, but don’t
have to disclose their donors, expenditures or even their members.”
There’s no hyperlink supporting the sentence and it strikes me as
way off the mark. Any sense of where this number comes from?
The oped now posts this correction:
*Correction: May 18, 2016*
An Op-Ed article on May 10 about the regulation of “dark money” in
political campaigns misstated the nature of two-thirds of anonymous,
third-party spending during this election cycle. It is political
advertising spending, not overall spending.
There’s no citation supporting this statistic and I don’t think this is
correct either. Note the article refers to anonymous
/corporate/donations. I’d love to see the evidence behind this claim.
Update: Robert Mcguire says that this isstill almost certainly wrong.
<https://twitter.com/RobertMaguire_/status/733676031014535168>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82932&title=Not%20Sure%20NYT%20OpEd%20Correction%20on%20Corporate%20Political%20Spending%20is%20Correct&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
“U.S. Chamber Launches Campaign to Bolster Republican Senate Races”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82930>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 7:57 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82930>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ reports.
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/05/20/u-s-chamber-launches-campaign-to-bolster-republican-senate-races/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82930&title=%26%238220%3BU.S.%20Chamber%20Launches%20Campaign%20to%20Bolster%20Republican%20Senate%20Races%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Political Parties, Voting Systems, and the Separation of Powers”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82928>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 7:55 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82928>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Stephen Gardbaum has posted this draft on SSRN (forthcoming,American
Journal of Comparative Law
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2774419>). Here is
the abstract:
This article aims to show that whatever the formal arrangements on
the separation or “fusion” of executive and legislative powers —
whether presidential, parliamentary or semi-presidential — the way
any constitution operates in terms of concentrating or dispersing
power is significantly a function of both the political party and
electoral systems in place. They can not only fuse what a
constitution’s executive-legislative relations provisions separate,
but also separate what they fuse. As a result, the same set of
institutional relations can operate quite differently in separation
of powers terms depending on party and electoral system contexts.
In so doing, the article broadens and deepens the insight that the
original Madisonian framework of institutional competition between
the President and Congress has been rewritten by the subsequent,
unanticipated development of the modern political party system, so
that concentration or dispersal of political power — unified or
divided government — depends mostly on electoral outcomes. It
broadens the insight by showing this is true of all forms of
government and not only the U.S. presidential system. It deepens it
by drilling down one layer further and taking into account how party
systems and electoral outcomes are themselves affected by the method
of voting employed.
The article seeks to counter the tendency of constitutional lawyers
to focus on inter-branch relations alone and to overlook other
important institutional variables in thinking about separation of
powers and constitutional design more generally. It also aspires,
through the use of comparative and historical examples, to enhance
our understanding of the U.S. system of “separation of parties, not
powers.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82928&title=%26%238220%3BPolitical%20Parties%2C%20Voting%20Systems%2C%20and%20the%20Separation%20of%20Powers%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>
“Liberals are dangerously wrong about Citizen’s United: Money is
speech” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82926>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 7:54 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82926>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
John McGinnis LAT oped.
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcginnis-money-speech-liberals-20160522-snap-htmlstory.html>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82926&title=%26%238220%3BLiberals%20are%20dangerously%20wrong%20about%20Citizen%26%238217%3Bs%20United%3A%20Money%20is%20speech%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
More on the Judge Who Decided the Va. Voter ID Case
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82924>
Posted onMay 20, 2016 7:53 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82924>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Lots of readers asking me to highlightJudge Henry Hudson’s history
<http://www.businessinsider.com/judge-henry-hudson-obamacare-2010-12> in
light ofyesterday’s Va. voter id decision.
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82897>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82924&title=More%20on%20the%20Judge%20Who%20Decided%20the%20Va.%20Voter%20ID%20Case&description=>
Posted invoter id <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>
“Attorney General seeks partial stay in campaign spending ruling”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82922>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 8:57 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82922>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The
latest<http://helenair.com/news/state-and-regional/attorney-general-seeks-partial-stay-in-campaign-spending-ruling/article_8b232e0a-599e-5209-87a8-baa2022baff2.html>from
Montana:
Montana Attorney General Tim Fox’s office filed a motion for an
immediate partial stay with U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
after a ruling by U.S. District Judge Charles Lovell struck down the
state’s campaign contribution limits.
The brief was filed late Thursday afternoon, and the attorney
general’s office which represents Commissioner of Political
Practices Jonathan Motl, argued that unless the Ninth Circuit grants
the immediate request, suspending contribution limits “will cause
confusion and undermine the integrity of Montana’s electoral process.”
“Military and absentee voting has begun … and the primary election
is less than 20 days away,” the brief said. “… there can be no doubt
that unlimited donations from political parties would create mass
chaos in Montana’s election.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82922&title=%26%238220%3BAttorney%20General%20seeks%20partial%20stay%20in%20campaign%20spending%20ruling%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“McDonnell Case Already Impacting Other Ethics Cases”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82920>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 6:52 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82920>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=90024715&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0j4u5b0k0&split=0>:
The Supreme Court hasn’t yet ruled in the case of former Virginia
Gov. Robert McDonnell (R), but the case already is having an impact
on the corruption prosecutions of other former top officials.
Two former top state legislators in New York, Sheldon Silver (D) and
Dean Skelos (R), have been allowed to stay out of prison pending the
Supreme Court ruling in theMcDonnellcase, according to recent
rulings by the federal judges presiding over their cases. The high
court is expected to hand down a ruling regarding McDonnell before
its current term ends on June 27.
If McDonnell’s conviction is overturned, Silver and Skelos may be
allowed to stay out of prison indefinitely while their cases are
appealed, the new rulings indicated. The judges set briefing
schedules regarding the ex-lawmakers requests for bail pending
appeal—schedules that will be triggered when the Supreme Court
decides theMcDonnellcase.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82920&title=%26%238220%3BMcDonnell%20Case%20Already%20Impacting%20Other%20Ethics%20Cases%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Bill Weld, Running as a Libertarian, Likens Donald Trump’s
Immigration Plan to Kristallnacht” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82917>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 4:40 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82917>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/politics/libertarian-party-trump.html?_r=0>:
William F. Weld, the twice-elected former Republican governor of
Massachusetts, who was last seen campaigning in the 2006 Republican
primary for governor of New York, now hopes to be on a national
ticket as the vice-presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party.
And he is already on the attack.
In his first interview since accepting an invitation to be the
running mate of former Gov.Gary Johnson
<http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/candidates/gary-e-johnson?inline=nyt-per&version=meter+at+3&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FWZQqVmrllR&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click>of
New Mexico, Mr. Weld assailedDonald J. Trump
<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/donald-trump-on-the-issues.html?inline=nyt-per&version=meter+at+3&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FWZQqVmrllR&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click>over
his call to round up and deport the 11 million immigrants in the
country illegally.
“I can hear the glass crunching on Kristallnacht in the ghettos of
Warsaw and Vienna when I hear that, honest,” Mr. Weld said Thursday.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82917&title=%26%238220%3BBill%20Weld%2C%20Running%20as%20a%20Libertarian%2C%20Likens%20Donald%20Trump%E2%80%99s%20Immigration%20Plan%20to%20Kristallnacht%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,third parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=47>
“34 Republicans ask budget committee to fund voter ID education
campaign” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82915>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 4:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82915>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Wisconsin State Journal
<http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/republicans-ask-budget-committee-to-fund-voter-id-education-campaign/article_60903422-5d01-569a-a3a2-b0e50a0549d5.html>:
More than two dozen Assembly Republicans have asked the
Legislature’s budget-writing committee to consider approving money
to educate the public on the state’s law requiring voters to show
photo identification.
The names of 34 Assembly Republicans appeared on a letter dated
Thursday and addressed to Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, and
Rep. John Nygren, R-Marinette, who head the state’s Joint Finance
Committee. Twenty-eight of the lawmakers whose names appear on the
letter attached their signatures.
The letter asks the two lawmakers to schedule a meeting to consider
a May 10 request made by the Government Accountability Board to
spend $250,000 to re-start a public information campaign authorized
in 2011 when the law was passed but was stopped in 2012 after a
lawsuit blocked implementation of the law until this year.
The request comes amid a trial for a federal lawsuit challenging the
voter ID requirement and other recent changes to Wisconsin election law.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82915&title=%26%238220%3B34%20Republicans%20ask%20budget%20committee%20to%20fund%20voter%20ID%20education%20campaign%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Official: Jon Keyser voter fraud controversy spurs need for
elections reforms” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82913>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 4:24 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82913>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Colorado Gazette reports
<http://gazette.com/official-jon-keyser-voter-fraud-controversy-spurs-need-for-elections-reforms/article/1576483>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82913&title=%26%238220%3BOfficial%3A%20Jon%20Keyser%20voter%20fraud%20controversy%20spurs%20need%20for%20elections%20reforms%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“Voter ID Meets the Voting Rights Act: The Next Big Voting Rights
Battle” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82911>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:53 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82911>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Gans
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2016/05/voter-id-meets-voting-rights-act-next.html>:
Two huge cases challenging new voting restrictions will soon be
heard by the federal courts of appeal. On May 24, the entire Fifth
Circuit—the most conservative federal appeals court in the
nation—will hear/Veasey v. Abbott/, Texas’s appeal from a district
court ruling that struck down the state’s draconian voter
identification law—which allows use of a gun permit, but not a
government-issued employee or student photo identification card—as a
violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Last
August, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit issued aunanimous
ruling
<https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6874334814533351375&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr>,
written by G.W. Bush appointee Catharina Haynes, partially upholding
the district court’s decision, and Texas asked the full court to
hear the case. In its defense of the law, Texas is urging the court
of appeals to create a “voter identification” exception to the
Voting Rights Act, insisting that, if the Voting Rights Act is not
read narrowly, the Act’s nationwide prohibition on voting
discrimination is unconstitutional. On June 21, the Fourth Circuit
will hear/North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v.
McCrory,/an expedited appeal from a recent 485-pagedistrict court
ruling
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/us/politics/federal-judge-upholds-north-carolina-voter-id-law.html>upholding
an omnibus voter suppression law enacted by the North Carolina
legislature in 2013, which imposed a restrictive voter
identification requirement, while eliminating a host of voting
reforms designed to increase political participation by racial
minorities and others.
One, or even, both of these cases could reach the Supreme Court
later this year. In 2014, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan,dissented
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14a393_08m1.pdf>from the
Court’s refusal to block the Texas voter identification law for the
2014 election, stressing that the restrictive law “risks denying the
right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.” Last
month
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15a999.htm>,
the Supreme Court once again refused to intervene, but allowed the
plaintiffs to seek relief again if the Fifth Circuit did not rule or
vacate the stay by July 20. Importantly, the Supreme Court’s
unsigned order prevents the Fifth Circuit from simply running out
the clock on the thousands of voters whose rights are at stake.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82911&title=%26%238220%3BVoter%20ID%20Meets%20the%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%3A%20The%20Next%20Big%20Voting%20Rights%20Battle%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“‘Dark money,’ billionaires behind anti-Donald Trump ad barrage”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82909>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:49 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82909>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CPI reports.
<https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/05/19/19699/dark-money-billionaires-behind-anti-donald-trump-ad-barrage>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82909&title=%26%238220%3B%26%238216%3BDark%20money%2C%26%238217%3B%20billionaires%20behind%20anti-Donald%20Trump%20ad%20barrage%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Classified Legislation: Tracking Congress’s Library of Secret Law”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82907>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:48 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82907>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Dakota Rudesill:
<https://www.lawfareblog.com/classified-legislation-tracking-congresss-library-secret-law>
Most citizens assume that all of the law Congress writes is public.
That is not, in fact, true. Our general norm of publishing law has a
significant and largely overlooked legislative exception: classified
addenda associated with three annual national security acts. If a
four decade-old practice holds, theIntelligence Authorization Act
(IAA)
<http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/FY17_IAA_v2_xml_as%20introduced.pdf>_,_theNational
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
<http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/16-05-11-schedule-for-armed-services-full-committee-markup-of-the-national-defense-authorization-act-for-fiscal-year-2017>,
and theDepartment of Defense Appropriations Act (DODAA)
<http://appropriations.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hmkp-114-ap02-20160511-sd001.pdf>now
moving through Congress will all do part of their lawmaking inside
these classified documents.
Usually, when people discuss secret law, they are referring to
classified or otherwise unpublishedpresidential orders
<http://justsecurity.org/24306/no-reason-hide-amount-secret-law/>,Justice
<http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/dojinterrogationmemo20020801.pdf>Department
<http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/legacy/2011/03/25/johnyoo-memo-for-ag.pdf>memoranda
<https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/aclu-v-doj-foia-request-olc-memo>,
orForeign Intelligence Surveillance Court decisions
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html>.
In a recentarticle
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687223>, I
conclude that this claim of secret law’s existence is generally
credible and important, and that secret law is being produced by
Congress as well.
To date, Congress’s classified lawmaking has received scant
attention outside of a small circle of legislators, committee staff,
White House and agency officials, and budgeteers. Yet the public
record shows that these addenda govern enormously consequential
classified U.S. government activities, including surveillance,
covert action, and the use of missile-armeddrones
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/lawmakers-seek-to-stymie-plan-to-shift-control-of-drone-campaign-from-cia-to-pentagon/2014/01/15/c0096b18-7e0e-11e3-9556-4a4bf7bcbd84_story.html>.
By using the term “secret law” to describe what Congress is doing
here, I do not mean to suggest anything nefarious. Having served in
all three branches of government, including in the Intelligence
Community, I have the greatest regard for the public servants who
draft and implement secret law, and for the very real national
security considerations that drive its creation. I mean only that
there is a body of law that meets the following definition: legal
authorities that require compliance that are classified or otherwise
unpublished.
In this post I outline the origins, purposes, and dilemmas of these
classified legal authorities, and the varieties of legislative
references to them. I summarize the findings of myempirical analysis
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2687223>,
recently published in the/Harvard National Security Journal/
<http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Rudesill-Secret-Law.pdf>.
The addenda are an example of a broader three-branch phenomenon of
non-published law that we can reasonably term secret law―one with
which the nation needs to come to terms.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82907&title=%26%238220%3BClassified%20Legislation%3A%20Tracking%20Congress%E2%80%99s%20Library%20of%20Secret%20Law%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
“Our Democratic Constitution: A Brennan Center Workshop”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82905>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82905>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This looks good
<https://www.brennancenter.org/event/our-democratic-constitution-brennan-center-workshop-burt-neuborne>,
with Dawood, Hellman, Neuborne, and Wesier.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82905&title=%26%238220%3BOur%20Democratic%20Constitution%3A%20A%20Brennan%20Center%20Workshop%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Confronting the Results of Citizens United; Wisconsin case now
before the Supreme Court highlights just how much the justices got
wrong.” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82903>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:43 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82903>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brendan Fischer writes
<http://billmoyers.com/story/confronting-citizens-united/>for Bill Moyers.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82903&title=%26%238220%3BConfronting%20the%20Results%20of%20Citizens%20United%3B%20Wisconsin%20case%20now%20before%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20highlights%20just%20how%20much%20the%20justices%20got%20wrong.%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
O’Keefe Stings Himself <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82901>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:41 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82901>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
LOLOLOL. <https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/733397482563047426>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82901&title=O%26%238217%3BKeefe%20Stings%20Himself&description=>
Posted infraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>
“Big money strikes again in Montana”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82899>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:33 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82899>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Free Speech for People blogs.
<http://freespeechforpeople.org/big-money-strikes-again-in-montana/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82899&title=%26%238220%3BBig%20money%20strikes%20again%20in%20Montana%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“U.S. judge upholds Virginia voter ID law”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82897>
Posted onMay 19, 2016 2:23 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82897>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Richmond Times-Dispatch
<http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/article_fb14253d-0f3b-5e95-bed3-e37b9eac0bb1.html>:
A federal judge has upheld Virginia’s voter ID law challenged by the
Democratic Party of Virginia and two voters alleging the
Republican-controlled state legislature enacted it to curb the
number of young and minority voters.
“Mindful that the court’s mission is to judge not the wisdom of the
Virginia voter ID law, but rather its constitutionality, this court
cannot say that plaintiffs have met their burden of proof in showing
by a preponderance of the evidence that the Virginia voter ID law …
contravenes the Voting Rights Act, the First Amendment, the
Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, or the Twenty-Sixth
Amendment,” U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson wrote Thursday.
You can read the 62 page opinionhere
<https://www.scribd.com/doc/313197364/Lee-v-Virginia-State-Board-of-Elections#>.
Virginia’s law is not as strict as some other laws being challenged, and
in all of these challenges, the standards for winning are quite
difficult for plaintiffs. This is why the loss of Section 5 preclearance
thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in /Shelby County v.
Holder/is such a big deal.
Any appeal will go to the 4th Circuit, which has already fast-tracked
the appeal of North Carolina’s voter id/voting law.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D82897&title=%26%238220%3BU.S.%20judge%20upholds%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>,Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
--
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
http://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/20160520/bfef45fc/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/20160520/bfef45fc/attachment.png>
View list directory