[EL] more news 11/3/16

Thu Nov 3 18:06:53 PDT 2016

“Not Intimidated: A court has gotten the Trump campaign on the record promising not to intimidate voters on Election Day. That is huge.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88665>
Posted on November 3, 2016 5:06 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88665> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have written this piece<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/11/trump_campaign_promises_not_to_intimidate_voters_on_election_day_that_s.html> for Slate. It begins:
On Friday morning<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88641>, a federal district court will hear arguments<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88127> in a dispute<https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree> between the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee over whether the RNC, the Trump campaign, and its allies are violating a long-standing consent decree barring the RNC from engaging in intimidation of minority voters at the polls. It’s not the only case being heard on an emergency basis this week: Democrats have filed suit against<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88351> Donald Trump, Republican state parties, and Trump ally Roger Stone in the battleground states of Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88646>, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. In the Nevada suit, Stone has been ordered to explain<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88651> at a separate Friday hearing what his questionable “Stop the Steal” organization<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/20/citizens-for-donald-trump-exit-poll-roger-stone-rigged-election-claim> is planning for Election Day.
But regardless of how these hearings go Friday, the lawsuits have already borne fruit by getting the campaign on the record with its plans and promises not to intimidate voters. In an important development on Thursday afternoon, the Trump campaign in response to the lawsuits sent an email<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88629> to Nevada campaign workers describing for them what constitutes illegal harassment and what constitutes good behavior. By getting Trump on the record promising not to harass voters with its “ballot security” activities, the Democrats have significantly lessened the chances of Trump-driven voter intimidation on Election Day.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88665&title=%E2%80%9CNot%20Intimidated%3A%20A%20court%20has%20gotten%20the%20Trump%20campaign%20on%20the%20record%20promising%20not%20to%20intimidate%20voters%20on%20Election%20Day.%20That%20is%20huge.%E2%80%9>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Concerns grow around voter intimidation and fraud – Press Play with Madeleine Brand on KCRW”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88663>
Posted on November 3, 2016 5:02 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88663> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I did this interview<http://kcrw.co/2eF7nZV> with the great Madeline Brand.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88663&title=%E2%80%9CConcerns%20grow%20around%20voter%20intimidation%20and%20fraud%20%E2%80%93%20Press%20Play%20with%20Madeleine%20Brand%20on%20KCRW%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Exclusive: U.S. Intel Preparing for Possible Election Day Cyberattacks”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88661>
Posted on November 3, 2016 4:52 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88661> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NBC News video<http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/exclusive-u-s-intel-preparing-for-possible-election-day-cyberattacks-800452163840>:
U.S. Homeland Security, military and intelligence officials tell NBC News that the U.S. government is gearing up for an unprecedented effort to protect the voting process on Election Day.
“deeply concerned.”
US officials fear Twitter, Facebook interference, or fake documents without time to be vetted.
See my October 21 post: If Today’s Internet Outage/Hacking Was a Dry Run for Election Day, Things Could Get Very Bad<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87926>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88661&title=%E2%80%9CExclusive%3A%20U.S.%20Intel%20Preparing%20for%20Possible%20Election%20Day%20Cyberattacks%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

Federal Court, Relying on Purcell Principle, Rejects Late Challenge to NY Ban on Ballot Selfies<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88658>
Posted on November 3, 2016 4:24 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88658> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Opinion. <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/ny-selfie.pdf>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88658&title=Federal%20Court%2C%20Relying%20on%20Purcell%20Principle%2C%20Rejects%20Late%20Challenge%20to%20NY%20Ban%20on%20Ballot%20Selfies>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

Breaking: Roger Stone Ordered to Respond at NV Voter Intimidation Hearing Tomorrow [UPDATE and POSSIBLE CORRECTION]<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88651>
Posted on November 3, 2016 3:37 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88651> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Docket entry:
ORDER that a hearing on the Plaintiff’s [6] Emergency Motion for TRO is set for 11/4/2016 03:00 PM in LV Courtroom 7D before Judge Richard F. Boulware II. Defendants Stop the Steal, Inc. and Roger J. Stone, Jr, SHALL APPEAR at this hearing. Defendants Stop the Steal and Roger J. Stone, Jr are to respond in writing to the [6] Motion by 11/3/2016. Plaintiffs SHALL SERVE a copy of this Order on Defendants, no later than 11:00 AM on 11/4/2016. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 11/3/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF – SLD)
It will be great to get this dirty trickster on the record, preferably under oath.
MORE from the full order:<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/161103.pdf>
Defendants Stop the Steal and Roger J. Stone, Jr are ORDERED to respond in writing to the Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order by on November 3, 2016. Defendants are further ORDERED to attach to their responsive pleading the following information:
a.) Training material provided to any individuals volunteering with the Defendants or organized by the Defendants as poll watchers, poll observers, exit pollsters or any other similarly tasked individuals. This includes, but is not limited to, the information sent to “registered exit pollers” in Nevada, as represented in Exhibit 5 to Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order – “Stop the Steal website home page”.
This attachment may be filed UNDER SEAL based upon a representation and supporting legal authority that it may contain proprietary information.
Note:  I’m getting clarification on whether this requires a personal appearance by Stone or not.  An earlier version of this post seaid personal appearance.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88651&title=Breaking%3A%20Roger%20Stone%20Ordered%20to%20Respond%20at%20NV%20Voter%20Intimidation%20Hearing%20Tomorrow%20%5BUPDATE%20and%20POSSIBLE%20CORRECTION%5D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Montco judge extends deadline for absentee ballots”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88649>
Posted on November 3, 2016 2:32 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88649> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Voters win.<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20161104_Montco_seeks_to_extend_deadline_for_absentee_ballots.html>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88649&title=%E2%80%9CMontco%20judge%20extends%20deadline%20for%20absentee%20ballots%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Breaking: Democrats File Another Lawsuit Against Trump, Stone, and (This Time) the North Carolina GOP<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88646>
Posted on November 3, 2016 2:28 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88646> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Follows the model<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88351> of the earlier lawsuits in AZ, OH, NV, PA.
NC Complaint.<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-complaint.pdf>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88646&title=Breaking%3A%20Democrats%20File%20Another%20Lawsuit%20Against%20Trump%2C%20Stone%2C%20and%20(This%20Time)%20the%20North%20Carolina%20GOP>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

RNC Files Latest Response in DNC v. RNC Voter Intimidation Case, with Hearing Set for 10 am Tomorrow<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88641>
Posted on November 3, 2016 2:12 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88641> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
You can read the response here<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/119111384484.pdf>. The RNC says there’s not enough evidence they are violating the consent decree to justify any additional remedies or sanctions. A snippet on Ms. Holland, the person who sent the controversial text message: <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88403>
First, none of the individuals named in the declarations serve in any capacity as an RNC member, employee, contractor, or volunteer. See Phillippe 2d Supp. Decl. ¶¶ 9-17; Talbot Decl. ¶ 7; Graves Decl. ¶ 5. There are only two individuals identified by their full name — Kishanna Holland and Onita Petersen. Ms. Holland was hired by Stampede Consulting, LLC to serve as a poll observer. See Turner Decl. ¶ 10. Stampede is not working for the RNC in Nevada,1 see Turner Decl. ¶ 7, and Ms. Holland was not hired and is not working on the RNC’s behalf. See id. ¶ 10; see also Phillippe 2d Supp. Decl. ¶¶ 14-15; Talbot Decl. ¶ 7. Moreover, as the attached declarations explain, many of the details in the DNC’s declarations are wrong. For example, Ms. Holland does not appear to be a law student from New York. See Phillippe 2d Supp. Decl. ¶ 16. She also did not move temporarily to Las Vegas to observe the election. See id.
FN: The RNC has retained Stampede Consulting, LLC in connection with get-out-the-vote efforts only in certain districts in a different state. See Phillipe 2d Supp. Decl. ¶ 15; see also 2009 Order ¶ 5 (permitting these activities). The contract between the RNC and Stampede Consulting is expressly limited to those duties. See Phillippe 2d Supp. Decl. ¶ 15; see generally Bankers Trust Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 752 F.2d 874, 882 (3d Cir. 1985) (noting rule that principal is not liable for acts of agent outside scope of authority); Pedro Realty Inc. v. Silva, 399 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981) (“a principal is not liable for actions of its agents committed outside the scope of its employment and before one may infer that the principal ratified unauthorized acts of his agent, evidence must demonstrate that the principal was fully informed or that he approved of those acts”).
And more on Stampede:
After due diligence, it appears that “Charlene” could refer to Charlene Stamps, who was hired by Stamped Consulting, LLC to perform poll-watching duties and, like Ms. Holland, has no connection to the RNC.
UPDATE: From the DNC response:<https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3213848/DNCvRNC-Doc127.pdf>
In the November 3 telephone conference with the Court, counsel for the RNC stated that two of these five individuals—Kishanna Holland and “Charlene”—are working for Stampede Consulting, not the RNC. Counsel acknowledged, however, that Stampede is a contractor for the RNC. Indeed, an FEC filing that includes the name of Donald Trump, the candidate supported by the expenditure shows that just a few weeks ago, the RNC paid Stampede $1.3 million for “GOTV consulting.” Supplemental Certification of Angelo J. Genova, Esq. at Ex. 1 (“Genova Supp. Cert.”). Because as RNC appears to concede, the Consent Decree applies to contractors of Case 2:81-cv-03876-JMV-JBC Document 127 Filed 11/03/16 Page 5 of 15 PageID: 6382 3 the RNC, the Stampede activities alone established a Consent Decree violation. See DNC Mem. at 2 (Consent Decree applies to actions by the RNC directly, indirectly, or through its agents or employees); RNC Mem. at 11 (“All staff recipients, employees, contractors, and volunteers were directed that they ‘must strictly avoid participation in any planning meeting, recruitment efforts, and other activities related to [election day operations] and/or the prevention of voter fraud.” (emphasis added)).
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88641&title=RNC%20Files%20Latest%20Response%20in%20DNC%20v.%20RNC%20Voter%20Intimidation%20Case%2C%20with%20Hearing%20Set%20for%2010%20am%20Tomorrow>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

VA GOP: “Republican Election Officers are the 1st line of defense against election fraud”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88637>
Posted on November 3, 2016 1:50 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88637> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Powerpoint presentation<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/119111384357.pdf> from Republican Party of VA for election officers and poll watchers (filed as part of DNC v. RNC litigation)
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88637&title=VA%20GOP%3A%20%E2%80%9CRepublican%20Election%20Officers%20are%20the%201st%20line%20of%20defense%20against%20election%20fraud%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“The Strange Career of the Voter-Fraud Myth”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88634>
Posted on November 3, 2016 1:30 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88634> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Must-read<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/opinion/the-strange-career-of-the-voter-fraud-myth.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0> Dale Ho NYT oped:
Early voting is underway, and according to Donald J. Trump, so is voter fraud. Almost daily, he proclaims that “large-scale voter fraud” is happening and that the election is “rigged.” Politicians across the spectrum have criticized this nonsense as divorced from reality, deleterious to our democracy and unprecedented in our elections.
It’s good to see such a strong, bipartisan pushback, but the critics are wrong on that last point. Thinly supported allegations of electoral malfeasance have been deployed throughout American history, often by those who want to restrict the vote.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88634&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Strange%20Career%20of%20the%20Voter-Fraud%20Myth%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter id<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>

Fear of Black People Voting Dept: “Emails show how Republicans lobbied to limit voting hours in North Carolina”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88632>
Posted on November 3, 2016 1:25 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88632> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Reuters:<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-northcarolina-insight-idUSKBN12Y0ZY>
In two emails, on Aug. 11 and Aug. 14, Woodhouse urged Republicans serving on county election boards to follow the “party line” on curtailing the early voting period.
“Many of our folks are angry and opposed to Sunday voting,” he wrote. “Six days of voting in one week is enough. Period.” Keeping polling sites open for the full 17-day early voting period “may be wasteful and unnecessary,” he added.
Woodhouse’s emails were subsequently published by local media, but he was not alone in lobbying to limit voting hours, the Reuters review of public records shows. The review counted similar emails from at least four other Republican Party officials to election boards, each of which is composed of two Republicans and one Democrat.
The same day that Woodhouse sent his Aug. 11 email, Elaine Hewitt, a member of the Rowan County Republican Executive Committee, sent the county elections board two proposed schedules for early voting, both of which included just one site for the first four days and no sites on Sundays.
“With all of the opportunities to vote by mail, early in person Monday – Saturday, and on Election Day, there is no justification for requiring election workers to work on Sundays,” she wrote.
Garry Terry, the chairman of the Republican Party for North Carolina’s First Congressional District, sent an email on Aug. 13 to elections board members in his region, reminding them to act “in the best interest of the Republican Party” by opposing Sunday voting and restricting early voting to one location.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88632&title=Fear%20of%20Black%20People%20Voting%20Dept%3A%20%E2%80%9CEmails%20show%20how%20Republicans%20lobbied%20to%20limit%20voting%20hours%20in%20North%20Carolina%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Trump Campaign Warns Its NV Poll Watchers Against Challenging Voters<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88629>
Posted on November 3, 2016 1:07 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88629> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
From this filing in the NV GOP suit,<https://www.scribd.com/document/329911609/Nv-Trump-Filing> an email sent today to “Team Trump” in Nevada:

[creen-shot-2016-11-03-at-1-02-50-pm]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-11-03-at-1.02.50-PM.png>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88629&title=Trump%20Campaign%20Warns%20Its%20NV%20Poll%20Watchers%20Against%20Challenging%20Voters>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Time for an ACLU Shift on Campaign Finance?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88626>
Posted on November 3, 2016 12:34 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88626> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Eliza Newlin Carney<http://prospect.org/article/time-aclu-shift-campaign-finance> for TAP:
Now that Georgetown constitutional law professor David Cole has been named the American Civil Liberties Union’s next national legal director, his April article<http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/04/how-to-reverse-citizens-united/471504/> in The Atlantic on “How to Reverse Citizens United” delivers a second punch.
Cole’s article gives campaign-finance reform advocates a blueprint for how to overturn the Supreme Court’s controversial 2010 ruling to deregulate campaign spending, which has ushered in a flood of secret big money unseen since Watergate, and has fueled mounting public anger over political corruption.
Yet Cole’s new employer sided squarely with the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC, arguing as it has in a string of cases going all the way back to Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 that limits on political spending trample on the First Amendment. So what gives? Is the ACLU suddenly changing its campaign-finance position? Or has Cole had a change of heart?
Neither, says Cole, who told The American Prospect that both the Buckley ruling to ban individual spending limits, and the aspect of the Citizens United ruling that permits unlimited corporate political spending were essentially decided correctly. On both scores, Cole aligns himself with the ACLU.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88626&title=%E2%80%9CTime%20for%20an%20ACLU%20Shift%20on%20Campaign%20Finance%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“With eight Supreme Court justices, an undecided election could be ‘nightmare scenario”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88624>
Posted on November 3, 2016 12:31 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88624> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Mark Sherman<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/20161103_ap_c8d132817a88460abd146fc8f1e64303.html> of the AP reports.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88624&title=%E2%80%9CWith%20eight%20Supreme%20Court%20justices%2C%20an%20undecided%20election%20could%20be%20%E2%80%98nightmare%20scenario%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Hundreds in Montco say they haven’t received absentee ballots”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88622>
Posted on November 3, 2016 11:56 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88622> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Philly.com:<http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20161103_Hundreds_in_Montco_say_they_haven_t_received_absentee_ballots.html>
Days before the Pennsylvania deadline to return completed absentee ballots, hundreds of voters in Montgomery County are complaining that they have not yet received their absentee ballots in the mail.
 Democrats and Republicans have expressed concern about the issue, and the GOP filed an emergency petition last week requesting an extension of the deadline to return completed absentee ballots because “a great number” had not been delivered. A county judge dismissed that request Monday.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88622&title=%E2%80%9CHundreds%20in%20Montco%20say%20they%20haven%E2%80%99t%20received%20absentee%20ballots%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Republicans are now vowing Total War. And the consequences could be immense.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88620>
Posted on November 3, 2016 11:50 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88620> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Important read <https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/11/03/republicans-are-now-vowing-total-war-and-the-consequences-could-be-immense/> from Paul Waldman:
I know, my conservative friends will say that this kind of talk is just fear-mongering and exaggeration. But there is something deeply troubling happening right now, and it goes beyond the ordinary trading of blows in a campaign season. Consider these recent developments:

  *   There appears to be a war going on inside the FBI, and from what we can tell, a group of rogue agents, mostly in New York, may be in such a fervor<http://www.wsj.com/articles/secret-recordings-fueled-fbi-feud-in-clinton-probe-1478135518> to destroy Hillary Clinton that they may be aggressively leaking damaging innuendo to the press against her in the waning days of the campaign. They succeeded in their apparent goal of making FBI director James Comey a tool of their campaign — and the basis for their investigation is an anti-Clinton book written under the auspices of an organization of which the CEO of the Trump campaign is co-founder and chairman. Pro-Trump FBI agents now seem to be coordinating<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/03/meet-donald-trump-s-top-fbi-fanboy.html> with Trump surrogates to do maximal possible damage to Clinton.
  *   Republicans continue to cheer the fact that the electronic systems of American political groups were illegally hacked, and then private communications were selectively released in order to do damage to one side in this election. The Republican nominee has explicitly asked<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-invites-russia-to-meddle-in-the-us-presidential-race-with-clintons-emails/2016/07/27/a85d799e-5414-11e6-b7de-dfe509430c39_story.html> a hostile foreign power to hack into his opponent’s electronic systems.
  *   High-ranking Republican officeholders are now suggesting that they may impeach Clinton as soon as she takes office. These are not just backbench nutbars of the Louie Gohmert variety, but people with genuine power, including Ron Johnson<http://m.beloitdailynews.com/mobile/news/johnson-clinton-could-be-impeached/article_e6451d9c-a03c-11e6-b059-e3910e7e9427.html>, the senator from Wisconsin, Michael McCaul<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clinton-could-be-impeached-if-elected>, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and veteran legislators like James Sensenbrenner and Peter King<http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/politics/gop-congressmen-constitutional-crisis/>. The message is being echoed by top Trump surrogates like Rudy Giuliani<http://time.com/4555119/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-impeachment/>.
  *   There is a growing movement<https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/10/27/republicans-are-already-treating-clintons-presidency-as-illegitimate> among Republicans in the Senate to simply refuse to approve any nominee appointed by a Democratic president to the Supreme Court, leaving open any and all vacancies until a Republican can be elected to fill them.
  *   State and local Republican officials are engaged in widespread and systematic efforts<http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/03/federal_judge_slams_north_carolina_voter_purge.html> to suppress the votes of African-Americans and other groups likely to vote disproportionately Democratic; in many cases officials have been ordered by courts to stop their suppression efforts and they have simply ignored the court orders<https://www.thenation.com/article/gop-states-keep-ignoring-court-orders-to-restore-voting-rights/>.
  *   Republican elected officials increasingly feel emboldened to openly suggest<http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/oklahoma-legislator-on-hillary-clinton-two-words-firing-squad/article_6fa93116-17bf-5a89-abfa-84402602a009.html>violence<http://www.vox.com/2016/10/31/13482672/richard-burr-hillary-clinton-gun-joke> against Clinton should she be elected.
It is important to understand that is not normal. This is not just bare-knuckle politics. Something extraordinary is happening.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88620&title=%E2%80%9CRepublicans%20are%20now%20vowing%20Total%20War.%20And%20the%20consequences%20could%20be%20immense.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in legislation and legislatures<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>, political polarization<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=68>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Judicial Watch Files Supreme Court Jurisdictional Statement in Maryland Partisan Gerrymandering Case involving Congressional Districts<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88617>
Posted on November 3, 2016 10:49 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88617> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read it here.<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/parrott-js.pdf>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88617&title=Judicial%20Watch%20Files%20Supreme%20Court%20Jurisdictional%20Statement%20in%20Maryland%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Case%20involving%20Congressional%20Districts>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“State Judicial Elections Become Political Battlegrounds”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88615>
Posted on November 3, 2016 10:44 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88615> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NPR reports.<http://www.npr.org/2016/11/02/500351735/state-judicial-elections-become-political-battlegrounds>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88615&title=%E2%80%9CState%20Judicial%20Elections%20Become%20Political%20Battlegrounds%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, judicial elections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>

“Philadelphia’s transit strike could affect who wins the election”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88613>
Posted on November 3, 2016 10:09 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88613> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.<http://Philadelphia%E2%80%99s%20transit%20strike%20could%20affect%20who%20wins%20the%20election/>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88613&title=%E2%80%9CPhiladelphia%E2%80%99s%20transit%20strike%20could%20affect%20who%20wins%20the%20election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“Commentary: Yes, broken voter ID laws will affect the 2016 election”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88611>
Posted on November 3, 2016 10:07 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88611> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Herman Schwartz<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-election-voting-rights-commentary-idUSKBN12Y05H> for Reuters.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88611&title=%E2%80%9CCommentary%3A%20Yes%2C%20broken%20voter%20ID%20laws%20will%20affect%20the%202016%20election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Sneaky Ads on Twitter Tell Voters to Text Votes for Hillary Clinton; A Digital Form of Voter Suppression?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88609>
Posted on November 3, 2016 9:49 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88609> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jeff John Roberts<http://fortune.com/2016/11/03/text-vote-hillary-clinton/> for Fortune.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88609&title=%E2%80%9CSneaky%20Ads%20on%20Twitter%20Tell%20Voters%20to%20Text%20Votes%20for%20Hillary%20Clinton%3B%20A%20Digital%20Form%20of%20Voter%20Suppression%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Sixteen things to watch in ‘16”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88607>
Posted on November 3, 2016 9:46 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88607> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

That’s the lead story in this week’s Electionline Weekly. <http://www.electionline.org/index.php/electionline-weekly>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88607&title=%E2%80%9CSixteen%20things%20to%20watch%20in%20%E2%80%9816%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

Overseas voters: “Judge rejects bid to expand voting rights”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88604>
Posted on November 3, 2016 8:09 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88604> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin:<http://www.chicagolawbulletin.com/Articles/2016/11/02/No-expand-IL-expat-voter-11-2-16.aspx>
A federal judge has dealt a setback to former Illinois residents who are blocked from voting by absentee ballot in next week’s presidential election because they now live in certain U.S. territories.
In a written opinion last week, U.S. District Judge Joan B. Gottschall rejected the argument that the Illinois Military Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act violates the equal protection clause by treating former Illinois voters differently depending on their current residence.
Illinois’ MOVE Act bars former state residents living in Puerto Rico, Guam or the U.S. Virgin Islands from voting by Illinois absentee ballot in federal elections, but allows their counterparts in American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands to do so.
The disparate treatment, Gottschall held, “is rationally related to legitimate state interests.”
Those interests include the “synchronization” of Illinois MOVE with federal overseas and absentee voting laws, Gottschall held.
This will be interesting to watch up the food chain.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88604&title=Overseas%20voters%3A%20%E2%80%9CJudge%20rejects%20bid%20to%20expand%20voting%20rights%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Democracy 21 Study — Outside Groups Greatly Outspend Candidates in Seven Battleground Senate Races”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88602>
Posted on November 3, 2016 8:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88602> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See here.<http://www.democracy21.org/money-in-politics/press-releases-money-in-politics/democracy-21-study-outside-groups-greatly-outspend-candidates-in-seven-battleground-senate-races/>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88602&title=%E2%80%9CDemocracy%2021%20Study%20%E2%80%94%20Outside%20Groups%20Greatly%20Outspend%20Candidates%20in%20Seven%20Battleground%20Senate%20Races%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

Breaking: Federal Court Rejects PA GOP Efforts to Send Poll Watchers to Different Counties to Look for Voter Fraud<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88592>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:40 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88592> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Under Pennsylvania law, poll watchers must be from the same county in which they are registered to vote. Republicans failed to change that law in the legislature, and the PA Republican party filed a federal lawsuit seeking to make the change.
When the suit was filed<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87930>, I indicated I thought it had little chance of success.
And now a federal district court has issued this 28 page opinion<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/pappert-order.pdf> rejecting the challenge.
Part of the reason is timing (laches, Purcell principle): “There was no need for this judicial fire drill and Plaintiffs offer no reasonable explanation or justification for the harried process they created.”
The court also rejected the argument that relief was necessary to stop voter fraud which would dilute the vote: “Plaintiffs correctly note that ‘a free and fair election requires ballot security.’ (Id.) While this statement is uncontroversial, the Plaintiffs’ preoccupation with the role of poll watchers to deter purported voter fraud disregards other aspects of the regulatory framework the Commonwealth designed to ensure ballot integrity and thus prevent vote dilution.”
Plaintiffs have not shown that Section 2687(b) burdens their fundamental right to vote or in any way limits their range of choices in the voting booth. The individual voters who bring this case along with the Republican Party are not hindered in their exercise of the franchise: unlike the plaintiff in Burdick, where the State of Hawaii banned write-in voting, Burdick, 504 U.S. at 430, Plaintiffs here may cast ballots for whomever they wish; they are also free to serve as poll watchers in the counties in which they are qualified electors if appointed by the party or a candidate. Indeed the Plaintiffs acknowledge that there is no individual constitutional right to serve as a poll watcher, (Hr’g Tr. 175:17–176:1), but rather the right is conferred by statute. Under that statutory right, an individual may serve as a poll watcher only if appointed to do so by a candidate or the party—unaffiliated individuals with concerns over ballot integrity are not authorized to monitor the polls uninvited. See 25 P.S. § 2687(a). The Republican Party is similarly unable to demonstrate a burden on its rights to equal protection and due process—it points to no polling place that Section 2687(b) prevents it from staffing with poll watchers.
The court also rejected other arguments such as a First Amendment right to engage in poll watching, and found that plaintiffs would suffer no irreparable harm and that an injunction would not be in the public interest.
If the PAGOP appeals, I don’t expect they will do any better up the food chain.
[This post has been updated.]
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88592&title=Breaking%3A%20Federal%20Court%20Rejects%20PA%20GOP%20Efforts%20to%20Send%20Poll%20Watchers%20to%20Different%20Counties%20to%20Look%20for%20Voter%20Fraud>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

MN: “Voters’ group challenges polling-place procedure”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88590>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:35 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88590> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Star-Tribune:<http://www.startribune.com/voters-group-challenges-polling-place-procedure/399749811/>
A group that has repeatedly challenged Minnesota’s elections process says several election judges — including three it is joining in a new lawsuit — are refusing to follow their duties at polling places because they disagree with how the state checks voters’ eligibility.
The Minnesota Voters Alliance filed lawsuits last week in Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis counties with election officials from each area, contending that the secretary of state’s office is not doing enough to block ineligible voters, including felons, noncitizens and people considered wards of the state because of their developmental disabilities or other issues.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88590&title=MN%3A%20%E2%80%9CVoters%E2%80%99%20group%20challenges%20polling-place%20procedure%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Understanding the Adoption of Voter Identification Laws in the American States”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88588>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:32 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88588> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Daniel Biggers and Michael Hanmer have written this article<https://gvpt.umd.edu/sites/gvpt.umd.edu/files/pubs/voter_id_adoption.pdf> (forthcoming American Politics Research). Here is the abstract:
Recently, many states have reversed the decades-long trend of facilitating ballot access by enacting a wave of laws requesting or requiring identification from registrants before they vote. Identification laws, however, are not an entirely new phenomenon. We offer new theoretical insights regarding how changes in political power influence the adoption of identification laws. In the most extensive analysis to date, we use event history analysis to examine why states adopted a range of identification laws over the past several decades. We consistently find that the propensity to adopt is greatest when control of the governor’s office and legislature switches to Republicans (relationships not previously identified), and that this likelihood increases further as the size of black and Latino populations in the state expands. We also find that federal legislation in the form of the Help America Vote Act seems to enhance the effects of switches in partisan control.
This looks to be important work confirming what many of us have been suspecting.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88588&title=%E2%80%9CUnderstanding%20the%20Adoption%20of%20Voter%20Identification%20Laws%20in%20the%20American%20States%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Early Voting Picks Up in North Carolina<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88586>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:27 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88586> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Charles Stewart crunches the numbers.<https://twitter.com/cstewartiii/status/794151157455167488>
As I said last week, it is not clear if cutbacks in early voting would lead to simply a shift in voting time or decreased turnout, or whether decreased turnout among African-American voters could be driven by something else, such as Obama no longer being on the ticket (he was a big draw in 2008 and 2012).
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88586&title=Early%20Voting%20Picks%20Up%20in%20North%20Carolina>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

NC: “U.S. Justice Department to monitor voting in Forsyth, Wake, Cumberland and Robeson counties”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88584>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:18 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88584> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP<http://www.journalnow.com/news/elections/u-s-justice-department-to-monitor-voting-in-forsyth-wake/article_d043c810-a1ca-11e6-ba5c-b354f7ac5685.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share> reports.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88584&title=NC%3A%20%E2%80%9CU.S.%20Justice%20Department%20to%20monitor%20voting%20in%20Forsyth%2C%20Wake%2C%20Cumberland%20and%20Robeson%20counties%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Department of Justice<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Without a modernized Voting Rights Act, there’s no such thing as an honest election”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88582>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:16 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88582> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jim Sensenbrenner, the leading congressional Republican supporting a fix to the Voting Rights Act after the Supreme Court’s Shelby County decision, has written this WaPo oped.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/without-a-modernized-voting-rights-act-theres-no-such-thing-as-an-honest-election/2016/11/02/ba1cb138-a06b-11e6-8832-23a007c77bb4_story.html?postshare=7361478182241885&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.61335e870497>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88582&title=%E2%80%9CWithout%20a%20modernized%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%2C%20there%E2%80%99s%20no%20such%20thing%20as%20an%20honest%20election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

9th Circuit, on 2-1 Vote, Rejects Argument AZ Must Count Ballots Cast in the Wrong Precinct<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88580>
Posted on November 3, 2016 7:14 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88580> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Same panel as in the other aspect of the Feldman case, same 2-1 split: this time<http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/11/02/16-16865.pdf>, whether Arizona’s rule that ballots cast by a voter in the wrong precinct should not count (for those races that the voter was eligible to vote in) violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The district court denied the preliminary injunction. The 9th Circuit, in a Judge Ikuta opinion, affirmed, relying in part on the Purcell princple. Chief Judge Thomas dissented, in a dissent filled with graphs showing how much of an outlier AZ is when it comes to ballots cast in the wrong precinct, and the racial disparities of this rule.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D88580&title=9th%20Circuit%2C%20on%202-1%20Vote%2C%20Rejects%20Argument%20AZ%20Must%20Count%20Ballots%20Cast%20in%20the%20Wrong%20Precinct>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, provisional ballots<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=67>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, 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<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/20161104/ba022b79/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161104/ba022b79/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 225051 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161104/ba022b79/attachment-0001.png>