[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/24/16
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon May 23 20:31:58 PDT 2016
“Can Gerrymanders Be Measured? An Examination of Wisconsin’s State
Assembly” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83029>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 8:29 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83029>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jon Krasno, Daniel Magleby, Michael D. McDonald, Shawn Donahue and Robin
Best have postedthis draft on SSRN
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2783144>, just as
the Wisconsin gerrymanderingtrial gets underwa
<http://www.wiscnews.com/bdc/news/local/article_eab12e68-805c-544a-8dd8-634a1140da65.html>y.
Here is the abstract:
In July, 2015 a group of Wisconsin Democrats filed a federal lawsuit
claiming that the state’s Assembly map adopted after the 2010 census
discriminates against Democrats by systematically underweighting
their votes relative to Republicans. This claim of a constitutional
violation rooted in the 14th Amendment offers judges a rationale to
constrain partisan gerrymandering – provided the plaintiffs can
produce objective and compelling evidence that a gerrymander has
been created. In this paper we evaluate the Wisconsin Assembly map
using a pair of methods proposed to detect and measure gerrymanders,
the “efficiency gap” measure employed by the plaintiffs in Wisconsin
and the median-mean comparison proposed by the authors.
Additionally, we use an innovative new procedure to produce a
comparison set of 10,000 neutral maps drawn by computer. The results
show that the Assembly map in Wisconsin is clearly a fairly
egregious gerrymander using the median-mean comparison but not via
the efficiency gap calculation. We examine the measurement qualities
of the efficiency gap to explain its shortcomings, especially in
Wisconsin, and review the remaining evidence to conclude that
Wisconsin’s Assembly map is the substantial pro-Republican
gerrymander that the plaintiffs claim it to be despite dubious
results using the efficiency-gap calculation.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83029&title=%26%238220%3BCan%20Gerrymanders%20Be%20Measured%3F%20An%20Examination%20of%20Wisconsin%26%238217%3Bs%20State%20Assembly%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
Judge Sri Srinivasan on 3-Judge Court Considering Major Soft Money
Challenge <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83026>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 8:22 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83026>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA:
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=90211798&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0j4x7q7a9&split=0>
A three-judge federal district court considering a challenge to
rules restricting “soft money” contributions to political parties
will hold a June 24 hearing to consider whether to go ahead with the
case (Republican Party of La. v. Federal Election Commission
<http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/REPUBLICAN_PARTY_OF_LOUISIANA_et_al_v_FEDERAL_ELECTION_COMMISSION/5>,
D.D.C., No. 15-cv-1241,order, 5/20/16).
The hearing, set by a May 20 court order from the U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia, will take place before U.S.
Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan and U.S. District Judges Christopher
Cooper and Tanya Chutkan. They are expected to hear from attorney
James Bopp, who has challenged party contribution limits, and
attorneys for the Federal Election Commission, which is defending
the limits.
The court order said the hearing will address pending motions for
summary judgment as well as an FEC motion to dissolve the
three-judge court. In that motion, the FEC sought to derail the
soft-money challenge before the case is put on a fast track to the
U.S. Supreme Court (4255 Money & Politics Report, 5/10/16
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/display/link_res.adp?fedfid=90211798&fname=a0j4b9r7g2&vname=mpebulallissues>).
The soft-money challenge was brought by Bopp, a prominent Republican
election lawyer with the Bopp Law Firm in Terre Haute, Ind., on
behalf of the Louisiana Republican Party and two local Republican
committees.
If I am seeing this right, this is three Obama appointees for this
panel, which has got to be a pretty good draw.
But the real action in this case, assuming it is not dismissed on
standing grounds, is at the Supreme Court. See my piece in /The
Atlantic/, The Supreme Court”s Next Big Fight Over Big Money in
Politics.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/supreme-court-soft-money/480978/>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83026&title=Judge%20Sri%20Srinivasan%20on%203-Judge%20Court%20Considering%20Major%20Soft%20Money%20Challenge&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Why the Fifth Circuit’s Decision This Week Could Decide the Fate of
Texas’ Voter ID Law” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83024>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 8:11 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83024>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
KUT
<http://kut.org/post/why-fifth-circuit-s-decision-week-could-decide-fate-texas-voter-id-law>:
On Tuesday a federal appeals court will take a second look at Texas’
controversial voter ID law. It’s one of the biggest voting rights
battles ahead of this year’s presidential election, and a ruling
from this court could be a final say on whether the state’s law is
in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
This will be the second time the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
hears the case Veasey v. Abbott. This time, all 15 active judges on
the court will weigh in. The case was brought by a coalition of
Texas voters and civil rights groups who say a state law requiring
photo ID at the polls is unconstitutional.
I will post a link to the oral argument recording when it is available.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83024&title=%26%238220%3BWhy%20the%20Fifth%20Circuit%E2%80%99s%20Decision%20This%20Week%20Could%20Decide%20the%20Fate%20of%20Texas%E2%80%99%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>
Big Money Affects All Candidates Besides Me Dep’t
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83022>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 8:01 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83022>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT:
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/us/politics/donald-trump-woody-johnson-fundraising.html?ref=politics>
But during the lead-up to this year’s New Hampshire primary, Mr.
Trump repeatedly pointed to Mr. Johnson as an example of the type of
donor whose special interest money he was not interested in.
“First of all, I actually feel that I could run the same kind of
campaign that I ran before,” Mr. Trump said, when asked about the
old remarks. He spent comparatively little money in the primaries,
which he lent his campaign or raised in smaller contributions, as
people like Mr. Bush burned through tens of millions of dollars.
“But we’re raising money for the Republicans, for the R.N.C., for
Congress and the Senate.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83022&title=Big%20Money%20Affects%20All%20Candidates%20Besides%20Me%20Dep%26%238217%3Bt&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Missouri Governor Jay Nixon sets Nov. 8 election for voter ID
ballot measure” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83020>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 7:51 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83020>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Smart
<http://www.kshb.com/news/state/missouri/missouri-governor-jay-nixon-sets-nov-8-election-for-voter-id-ballot-measure>to
put it on general election ballot, when Democrats have best chance to
defeat it.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83020&title=%26%238220%3BMissouri%20Governor%20Jay%20Nixon%20sets%20Nov.%208%20election%20for%20voter%20ID%20ballot%20measure%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
Va Redistricting Case Roundup <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83018>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 7:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83018>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
SCOTUSBlog:
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/05/afternoon-round-up-todays-opinions/#more-242924>
he Court also ruled today in/Wittman v. Personhuballah/
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/wittman-v-personhuballah/>,
finding that the members of Congress who intervened to defend
Virginia’s congressional redistricting plan do not have standing to
appeal. Coverage comes from Lyle Denniston for thisblog
<http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/05/opinion-analysis-racial-gerrymandering-case-ends/>,
Adam Liptak ofThe New York Times
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/us/politics/justices-let-court-imposed-redistricting-stand-in-virginia.html>,
Lydia Wheeler ofThe Hill
<http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/280898-court-dismisses-gop-challenge-to-virginias-redistricting-plan>,
Richard Wolf ofUSA Today
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/23/supreme-court-virginia-redistricting-republicans/84777584/>,
Robert Barnes ofThe Washington Post
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-leaves-in-place-va-redistricting-decision-rejects-gop-lawmakers-challenge/2016/05/23/1940110e-20f2-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html?postshare=5741464017409339&tid=ss_tw>,
Jess Bravin ofThe Wall Street Journal
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-upholds-new-congressional-map-for-virginia-1464014729>,
and Debra Cassens Weiss ofABA Journal
<http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/gop_lawmakers_outside_challenged_district_have_no_standing_in_appeal_scotus>.
Commentary comes from Rick Hasen atElection Law Blog
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=82993>, Ian Millhiser ofThinkProgress
<http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/23/3780855/one-aggressive-gerrymanders-country-just-lost-supreme-court/>,
Greg Stohr ofBloomberg
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-23/republicans-lose-at-u-s-supreme-court-on-virginia-voting-map>,
Libby Nelson ofVox
<http://www.vox.com/2016/5/23/11644160/wittman-personhuballah-redistricting-supreme-court>,
and Mark Joseph Stern ofSlate
<http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/23/green_v_brennan_and_wittman_v_personhuballah_supreme_court_decisions.html>,
who also covered today’s opinion in/Green v. Brennan/
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/green-v-donahoe/>in the
same article.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83018&title=Va%20Redistricting%20Case%20Roundup&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor,
black, Latino or elderly” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83016>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 4:33 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83016>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Sari Horwitz for WaPo
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html?postshare=8341464046238748&tid=ss_tw>:
In November, 17 states will have voting restrictions in place for
the first time in a presidential election. Eleven of those states
will require their residents to show a photo ID. They include swing
states such as Wisconsin and states with large African American and
Latino populations, such as North Carolina and Texas. On Tuesday,
the entire 15-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in
New Orleans, begins hearing a case regarding the legality of the
Texas law, considered to be the most stringent in the country.
Supporters say that everyone should easily be able to get a photo ID
and that the requirement is needed to combat voter fraud. But many
election experts say that the process for obtaining a photo ID can
be far more difficult than it looks for hundreds of thousands of
people across the country who do not have the required photo
identification cards. Those most likely to be affected are elderly
citizens, African Americans, Hispanics, and low-income residents.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83016&title=%26%238220%3BGetting%20a%20photo%20ID%20so%20you%20can%20vote%20is%20easy.%20Unless%20you%E2%80%99re%20poor%2C%20black%2C%20Latino%20or%20elderly%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>
2016 Supplement for Lowenstein, Hasen, and Tokaji Election Law
Casebook Coming in time for Fall Classes
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83014>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 4:23 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83014>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CAP
<http://www.cap-press.com/books/isbn/9781531000899/Election-Law-Fifth-Edition-2016-Supplement>:
Election Law, Fifth Edition: 2016 Supplement
byRichard L. Hasen
<http://www.cap-press.com/authors/396/Richard-L.-Hasen>,Daniel Hays
Lowenstein
<http://www.cap-press.com/authors/118/Daniel-Hays-Lowenstein>,Daniel P.
Tokaji <http://www.cap-press.com/authors/899/Daniel-P.-Tokaji>
Forthcoming August 2016•ISBN: 978-1-5310-0089-9
Tags:Election Law <http://www.cap-press.com/ms/30/Election-Law>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 Supplement to the fifth edition of/Election Law: Cases and
Materials/is up to date through the end of the Supreme Court’s October
2015 term. It includes excerpts of the Supreme Court’s decisions
in/McCutcheon v. FEC/and other post-/Citizens United/campaign finance
cases, as well as/Shelby County v. Holder/, which struck down a key
provision of the Voting Rights Act.
This year’s supplement covers recent redistricting cases from Alabama,
Arizona, Texas, and Virginia, including/Evenwel v. Abbott/, the latest
word on the meaning of one person, one vote. The supplement also
considers new developments in voting rights, including ongoing lawsuits
over voter identification, early voting, and voter registration, as well
as litigation over citizenship requirements under the Elections Clause
following the Supreme Court’s opinion in/Arizona v. Inter Tribal
Council/. Finally the supplement covers the Court’s decision in/Susan B.
Anthony List v. Driehaus/regarding false campaign speech.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Supplement Accompanies:
Election Law jacket
<http://www.cap-press.com/books/isbn/9781611631784/Election-Law-Fifth-Edition>
Election Law: Cases and Materials, Fifth Edition
<http://www.cap-press.com/books/isbn/9781611631784/Election-Law-Fifth-Edition>
byDaniel Hays Lowenstein
<http://www.cap-press.com/authors/118/Daniel-Hays-Lowenstein>,Richard L.
Hasen <http://www.cap-press.com/authors/396/Richard-L.-Hasen>,Daniel P.
Tokaji <http://www.cap-press.com/authors/899/Daniel-P.-Tokaji>
Add to cart <http://www.cap-press.com/cart.php?add=2386>
2012, 1012 pp, casebound,ISBN: 978-1-61163-178-4$115.00Electronic
Teaching Materials available
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complimentary Copy Request
<http://www.cap-press.com/compform.php?booknum=8038>If you are a
professor teaching in this field you mayrequest a complimentary copy
<http://www.cap-press.com/compform.php?booknum=8038>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83014&title=2016%20Supplement%20for%20Lowenstein%2C%20Hasen%2C%20and%20Tokaji%20Election%20Law%20Casebook%20Coming%20in%20time%20for%20Fall%20Classes&description=>
Posted inpedagogy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=23>
“First on CNN: Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe under federal
investigation for campaign contributions”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83012>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 4:13 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83012>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CNN:
<http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/terry-mcauliffe-fbi-doj-federal-investigation-campaign-contributions/index.html>
Virginia Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe is the subject of an
ongoing investigation by the FBI and prosecutors from the Justice
Department’s public integrity unit, U.S. officials briefed on the
probe say.
The investigation dates to at least last year and has focused, at
least in part, on whether donations to his gubernatorial campaign
violated the law, the officials said.
McAuliffe wasn’t notified by investigators that he is a target of
the probe, according to the officials.
“The Governor will certainly cooperate with the government if he is
contacted about it,” said Marc Elias, attorney for McAuliffe
campaign, in a statement to CNN.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83012&title=%26%238220%3BFirst%20on%20CNN%3A%20Virginia%20Gov.%20Terry%20McAuliffe%20under%20federal%20investigation%20for%20campaign%20contributions%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Critics argued with our analysis of U.S. political inequality. Here
are 5 ways they’re wrong” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83010>
Posted onMay 23, 2016 11:09 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=83010>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Gilens and Page
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/23/critics-challenge-our-portrait-of-americas-political-inequality-heres-5-ways-they-are-wrong/>:
In 2014 we publisheda study
<https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf>of
political inequality in America, called “Testing Theories of
American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.”
Our central finding was this: Economic elites and interest groups
can shape U.S. government policy — but Americans who are less well
off have essentially no influence over what their government does.
This was in line with a good deal of previous research byLarry
Bartels <http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8664.html>,Martin Gilens
<http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9836.html>,Larry Jacobs and
Benjamin Page
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lawrence_Jacobs/publication/231788159_Who_Influences_U.S._Foreign_Policy/links/0deec52ced161ce13b000000.pdf>,Elizabeth
Rigby and Gerald Wright
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12007/full>, and
others. But for some reason, our paper caught the media’s attention
in a way that few academic journal articles do.
Since then, a number ofquestions and criticisms
<http://www.vox.com/2016/5/9/11502464/gilens-page-oligarchy-study>have
been raised about our work — some offering sensible critiques and
alternative perspectives and others simply mistaken. We have
responded in print to some of these, and will list some of those
responses at the end of this post. Here we will respond briefly to
the most important challenges to our research. In brief, we don’t
believe that any of these critiques, individually or collectively,
undermine our central claims.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D83010&title=%26%238220%3BCritics%20argued%20with%20our%20analysis%20of%20U.S.%20political%20inequality.%20Here%20are%205%20ways%20they%E2%80%99re%20wrong%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
--
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/20160523/b6a4bb34/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/20160523/b6a4bb34/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2386.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8428 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160523/b6a4bb34/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: addcart.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1842 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160523/b6a4bb34/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: examcopy.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2389 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160523/b6a4bb34/attachment-0001.gif>
View list directory