[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/8/16

[Rick Hasen]

A Republican Electoral College Hail Mary, and the Current State of the Campaign<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87310>
Posted on October 8, 2016 8:41 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87310> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

By all accounts, Donald Trump’s Republican presidential campaign is imploding, with the latest revelations<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html> from a leaked 2005 “Access Hollywood” taping revealing not only Trump’s disrespect for women but a bragging about what amounts to a sexual assault<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/784508699393994752>. (Why anyone should be surprised<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/784752845824233472>by this given Trump’s previous statements and actions is something hard to fathom; take the latest expressions of shock with a huge grain of salt).

Hillary Clinton, who was already leading in the polls and seemed likely to continue her lead despitenew leaked revelations <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/politics/hillary-clinton-speeches-wikileaks.html?ref=politics> that she supports free trade and is cozier with banks and big business than she’s admitted (again, no surprise <http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/08/24/even-trump-and-clinton-need-big-money-donors-column/89229902/> there for anyone paying attention), seems now likely to prevail. Donald Trump has run the worst presidential campaign in modern history, judged only by the week after his poor debate performance <http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/donald-trump-debate-reaction/> featuring comments taking on a former beauty contestan<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/01/us/politics/donald-trump-alicia-machado.html>t as too fat, complaining about his microphone, supporting the convictions of the exonerated Central Park 5<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-says-central-park-five-are-guilty-despite-dna-n661941>, and making new irresponsible claims<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-suggests-illegal-immigrants-will-vote-as-parties-clash-over-voter-access/2016/10/07/fdca9404-8ca2-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html> about vote rigging and Mexicans coming across the border to vote). And all of that came before the “grab them by the pussy” comments came out.

Now, as the many members of the Republican establishment issue condemnations of him but still say they will vote for him and support his choice for the Supreme Court<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/784756298638172164>, a few are starting to break ranks, calling on him to withdraw. <https://twitter.com/jonathanchait/status/784770474685435904>

What happens if he withdraws? Back in August, I wrote about how Republicans could name a replacement for him if his place was vacant, and that courts should bend over backwards<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-trump-drop-out-20160804-snap-story.html> to allow Republicans to list a replacement choice on the ballot so voters would have a meaningful choice. But now that option comes too late. Not only are absentee ballots out, many people have already voted. Election Day has passed for hundreds of thousands of people already. (That’s no reason to oppose early voting; most early voters are committed partisans, and few who voted for Trump already would likely have second thoughts now).

But if Trump withdraws, and in fact even if he doesn’t, there is one other possible way out: the Electoral College. When we cast our votes for president they are actually cast for electors from each state (based roughly on population size) who then cast ballots for president. If Trump is chosen in some states, those electors could vote for Pence, or Romney, or Kasich, or whoever.  There are some laws that bar “faithless” electors from casting votes for anyone who did not win the popular vote in a state, but I have a hard time believing either the Republican-controlled House or a court (because it raises a political question) would stop the actions of a faithless elector. Ned Foley games out<http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2016/10/gop-repudiation-of-trump-before-118-if-so-then-what.html> how conflicts would work under the Twelfth Amendment; the bottom line is that if Trump got more votes than Clinton and Republicans control we could well end up with a President Pence.

The reason this is such a Hail Mary is because it depends on a huge number of unlikely contingencies: Trump withdraws or the Republican leadership abandons him yet still get voters to choose Trump on the ballot, the “Trump” campaign gets more electoral college votes than the Clinton campaign (requiring a lot of thinking and effort on the part of battered voters), electors chosen by the Trump campaign to serve the Republican ticket (some of whom LOVE Donald Trump) would act faithlessly and vote for Pence or someone else, and Republicans control the Senate.  All of this is possible, but not bloody likely.

That’s why the more plausible scenario is the following: after tomorrow’s debate, when Trump does not do well, some in the Republican leadership start withdrawing their endorsements. Watch Ryan move before McConnell, because Ryan has presidential aspirations of his own. Trump is essentially left twisting in the wind. The big message from Republicans is to vote for Republicans in the U.S. Senate to block Hillary Clinton from getting her agenda passed. More money from the Koch brothers,<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/us/politics/senate-koch-marco-rubio-pat-toomey.html?smid=tw-share> Sheldon Adelson <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/us/politics/republican-fund-raising-sheldon-adelson-donald-trump.html> and other plutocrats<https://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/> floods into the Senate races, which right now are very close on the question of control. And the more that Republican Senate candidates can distance themselves from Trump, the more likely it is that swing voters split their tickets and vote for the Republican Senate candidate.

The end game now is about denying Clinton control of the Senate, and with that comes loss of a free hand to choose a Supreme Court nominee (because if Democrats take even one seat of control, I expect they will nuke the filibuster to put in whoever they want for the Supreme Court). As I argued<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/supreme-court-greatest-civil-rights-cause> a year ago, the Supreme Court is the most important civil rights issue of our time: “The future composition of the Supreme Court is the most important civil rights cause of our time. It is more important than racial justice, marriage equality, voting rights, money in politics, abortion rights, gun rights, or managing climate change. It matters more because the ability to move forward in these other civil rights struggles depends first and foremost upon control of the Court. And control for the next generation is about to be up for grabs, likely in the next presidential election, a point many on the right but few on the left seem to have recognized.”

There’s so much at stake even if, as expected, Trump continues to implode.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87310&title=A%20Republican%20Electoral%20College%20Hail%20Mary%2C%20and%20the%20Current%20State%20of%20the%20Campaign&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Research on Filling Vacancies on Presidential Ballot<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87304>
Posted on October 8, 2016 8:03 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87304> by npersily<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=8>

Last July, my great research assistant, Zach Krowitz, helped put together this memo<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Rules-for-Vacant-Republican-Presidential-Nominee.docx> on the filling of vacancies on the presidential ballot.Continue reading →<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87304#more-87304>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87304&title=Research%20on%20Filling%20Vacancies%20on%20Presidential%20Ballot&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


“GOP repudiation of Trump before 11/8? If so, then what?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87302>
Posted on October 7, 2016 9:35 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87302> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ned Foley:<http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2016/10/gop-repudiation-of-trump-before-118-if-so-then-what.html>

As I write this on Friday night October 7, there is renewed talk of GOP leadership disavowing Trump.  True, Trump will still be on the ballot that we citizens cast.  But suppose the GOP leadership publicly announces that it will ask GOP electors, when they meet and vote on 12/19, to cast their presidential vote for Pence.  Then some GOP-leaning superPACs spend a lot money before 11/8 informing voters of this plan.

Suppose this plan is successful, insofar as it causes on Election Night, 11/8, the media to announce that GOP electors were chosen in enough states to amount to 270 Electoral College votes. Then on 12/19, the GOP electors all do as intended according to this plan: they cast their official Electoral College votes for Pence, not Trump.  Pursuant to 3 U.S.C. 9-11, these electors all sign their certificates showing Pence as their choice and send the certificates to Joe Biden, as President of the Senate.

Now, someone might claim that some of these electors violated a previous pledge they made to cast their Electoral College votes for Trump.  Maybe this claimant even arranges to send to Biden a separate set of Electoral College votes cast by replacement electors who were substituted because the faithless electors violated their pledge. (This move would be reminiscent of 1876.) We can assume that the claimant wouldn’t send to Biden 270+ Electoral College votes for Trump, but some number short of 270 in the hope of depriving Pence of the presidency.

What would happen when Biden receives two conflicting sets of Electoral College votes from some states, one set for Pence, and the second set for Trump?…
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87302&title=%E2%80%9CGOP%20repudiation%20of%20Trump%20before%2011%2F8%3F%20If%20so%2C%20then%20what%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, electoral college<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>


“Trump suggests illegal immigrants will vote as parties clash over voter access”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87300>
Posted on October 7, 2016 4:17 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87300> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Important WaPo piece<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-suggests-illegal-immigrants-will-vote-as-parties-clash-over-voter-access/2016/10/07/fdca9404-8ca2-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html>:

Donald Trump suggested without evidence Friday that the Obama administration was letting illegal immigrants into the country to vote — part of a series of unsubstantiated complaints by the GOP nominee that the election is “rigged” against him and that his backers should monitor polling locations in “certain areas.”

Trump’s allegations were a dramatic escalation of the usual partisan warfare over ballot access issues and came as Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) denied a request by Hillary Clinton’s campaign to extend voter registration because of Hurricane Matthew. The storm caused the extension of voter registration deadlines in South Carolina, while officials in Georgia have urged residents in storm-affected areas to register online instead of going to registration centers.

In Nevada, state Democrats also threatened Friday to file suit if the voter registration deadline is not extended beyond Saturday to comply with a federal law requiring deadlines to fall within the 30 days before an election.

Voting experts say they are increasingly troubled by Trump’s tone amid fresh strain on voting systems nationwide, warning that his comments could undermine trust in an election system renowned as largely efficient and free of corruption.


[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87300&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%20suggests%20illegal%20immigrants%20will%20vote%20as%20parties%20clash%20over%20voter%20access%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


Clinton in Private Speech Complains About Citizens United and the Supreme Court’s Money in Politics Cases<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87297>
Posted on October 7, 2016 3:41 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87297> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Wikileaks released<https://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/wikileaks-appears-to-release-hillary-clintons-paid-speech-tr?utm_term=.ulVdNR1dj#.ts53PLb38> some private speeches of Clinton’s that she’d been refusing to release.  And this, not really different from her public position, was in the tidbits:

[creen-shot-2016-10-07-at-3-34-41-pm]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-10-07-at-3.34.41-PM.png>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87297&title=Clinton%20in%20Private%20Speech%20Complains%20About%20Citizens%20United%20and%20the%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Money%20in%20Politics%20Cases&description=>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


U.S. Gov’t Officially Accuses Russia of Hacking to Influence U.S. Election, But Notes How Difficult to Mess with Vote Counting Systems<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87295>
Posted on October 7, 2016 12:38 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87295> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Statement <https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement> from DHS and ODNI:

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

Some states have also recently seen scanning and probing of their election-related systems, which in most cases originated from servers operated by a Russian company. However, we are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government. The USIC and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assess that it would be extremely difficult for someone, including a nation-state actor, to alter actual ballot counts or election results by cyber attack or intrusion. This assessment is based on the decentralized nature of our election system in this country and the number of protections state and local election officials have in place. States ensure that voting machines are not connected to the Internet, and there are numerous checks and balances as well as extensive oversight at multiple levels built into our election process.

Nevertheless, DHS continues to urge state and local election officials to be vigilant and seek cybersecurity assistance from DHS. A number of states have already done so. DHS is providing several services to state and local election officials to assist in their cybersecurity. These services include cyber “hygiene” scans of Internet-facing systems, risk and vulnerability assessments, information sharing about cyber incidents, and best practices for securing voter registration databases and addressing potential cyber threats. DHS has convened an Election Infrastructure Cybersecurity Working Group with experts across all levels of government to raise awareness of cybersecurity risks potentially affecting election infrastructure and the elections process. Secretary Johnson and DHS officials are working directly with the National Association of Secretaries of State to offer assistance, share information, and provide additional resources to state and local officials.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87295&title=U.S.%20Gov%E2%80%99t%20Officially%20Accuses%20Russia%20of%20Hacking%20to%20Influence%20U.S.%20Election%2C%20But%20Notes%20How%20Difficult%20to%20Mess%20with%20Vote%20Counting%20Systems&description=>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


“State Democratic Party to SOS: Voter registration deadline is illegal”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87293>
Posted on October 7, 2016 11:27 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87293> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jon Ralston:<http://www.ktnv.com/news/ralston/state-democratic-party-to-sos-voter-registration-deadline-is-illegal>

Nevada Democrats have notified the secretary of state that Saturday’s voter registration deadline violates federal law because it falls outside of a mandated 30-day window before the election.

If the SOS does not extend the deadline to Tuesday, the Democrats are prepared to take legal action to force the state to comply with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, the letter says. Saturday is 31 days before Election Day, and the next two days are a weekend day and a holiday (Columbus Day). Both Barbara Cegavske, the SOS, and Adam Laxalt, the attorney general who would have to defend any suit, are Republicans…

Here is the letter<https://www.scribd.com/document/326771478/Elias-Letter-to-Cegavske-Re-NVRA>.

I have asked for a response from the secretary of state.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87293&title=%E2%80%9CState%20Democratic%20Party%20to%20SOS%3A%20Voter%20registration%20deadline%20is%20illegal%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>


“Florida Gov. Rick Scott Under Fire for Voter Registration Decision”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87291>
Posted on October 7, 2016 9:39 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87291> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NBC News:<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/florida-gov-rick-scott-under-fire-voter-registration-decision-n661796>

Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s refusal to extend his state’s deadline for voter registration in response to Hurricane Matthew is leading to fears that perhaps tens of thousands of Floridians could be kept from registering, potentially impacting the presidential race.

The deadline to register is Tuesday, but with 1.5 million Floridians under mandatory evacuation orders, the Hillary Clinton campaign had urged Scott to extend it. He declined.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87291&title=%E2%80%9CFlorida%20Gov.%20Rick%20Scott%20Under%20Fire%20for%20Voter%20Registration%20Decision%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Scott Walker: DOJ review found ‘concerns’ with how state gave out free voter IDs”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87289>
Posted on October 7, 2016 9:33 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87289> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Wisconsin State Journal:<http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/scott-walker-doj-review-found-concerns-with-how-state-gave/article_5e74e0d2-fd51-55fa-8318-831f2bedc270.html>

A state Department of Justice spot check of the state’s program for providing free voter IDs found some “concerns” that will be addressed in an upcoming report to a federal judge, Gov. Scott Walker told reporters Friday.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87289&title=%E2%80%9CScott%20Walker%3A%20DOJ%20review%20found%20%E2%80%98concerns%E2%80%99%20with%20how%20state%20gave%20out%20free%20voter%20IDs%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


WI: “Absentee ballots at risk of being tossed”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87287>
Posted on October 7, 2016 9:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87287> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Little noticed Scott Walker change leading to disenfranchised voters. Patrick Marley<http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/10/07/absentee-ballots-risk-being-tossed/91728826/>:

Thousands of mailed absentee ballots could be thrown out because witnesses for the voters did not provide their full addresses.

With only a fraction of absentee ballots mailed in, the number of ballots at risk of being tossed is now in the hundreds and could easily grow to thousands in the state’s largest city alone, said Neil Albrecht, the executive director of the Milwaukee Election Commission.

In most cases where ballots are at risk, the error is a minor one — the witness provided a street address but not the name of a municipality. Often, the voter and witness live at the same address, but clerks aren’t allowed to fill in the missing information unless they track down the voter and get his or her permission.

“What distresses me the most about this is it’s mostly seniors,” Albrecht said. “I think it’s absurd that your ballot might not be counted because someone in your household didn’t record their municipality.”

The ballots are at risk because of a law Gov. Scott Walker and his fellow Republicans in the Legislature approved this spring that says mailed absentee ballots cannot be counted if witnesses do not provide an address.

Wouldn’t surprise me if we see yet another lawsuit in WI before the election.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87287&title=WI%3A%20%E2%80%9CAbsentee%20ballots%20at%20risk%20of%20being%20tossed%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in absentee ballots<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>, election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Trump: Feds Are Letting Immigrants ‘Pour Into The Country’ To Vote”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87285>
Posted on October 7, 2016 8:30 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87285> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-border-patrol-undocumented-immigrants-voting>:

In a meeting with a border patrol union leader on Friday, Donald Trump claimed that undocumented immigrants with criminal records are being allowed to stay in the country in order to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

“I’m sure you’re not going to write it,” Trump told reporters covering the meeting, according to a transcript posted by NBC’s Ali Vitali<https://twitter.com/alivitali/status/7843982847775457280>. “To me that’s— they’re letting people pour into the country so they can go vote.”

Trump was responding to a statement from Art Del Cueto, the vice president of the National Border Patrol Council, a union representing border patrol agents that has endorsed Trump, according to the Los Angeles Times<http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-live-updates-trailguide-trump-says-government-allowing-1475849223-htmlstory.html>.

Earlier: Donald Trump’s Dangerous Vote Rigging Comments Follow Years of Republican Voter Fraud Hysteria<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/trump-rigged-election-republican-voter-fraud-hysteria>


[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87285&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%3A%20Feds%20Are%20Letting%20Immigrants%20%E2%80%98Pour%20Into%20The%20Country%E2%80%99%20To%20Vote%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


6th Circuit Turns Down En Banc Consideration of OH Provisional/Absentee Balloting Case<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87282>
Posted on October 7, 2016 8:22 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87282> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Back on September 13 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=86484> I flagged a 2-1 decision of the 6th Circuit mostly rejecting a challenge to Ohio provisional absentee voting rules. (This is the one that featured the strong dissent from Judge Keith).

Plaintiffs sought to have the entire 6th Circuit rehear the case, and now that request has been rejected, with a promise of written opinions to follow.  <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2016-10-06-En-banc-denial.pdf> The plaintiffs are now considering their Supreme Court options (which I’d rate very low).  Statement from plaintiffs’ counsel:

The court has ensured that thousands of registered Ohio voters—whose eligibility county elections boards do not question—will be disenfranchised over trivial errors and omissions on ballot forms, like missing a zip code, writing a name in legible cursive rather than in block letters, etc.

The court has also tolerated a situation in which large, urban counties with the biggest percentages of minority voters are disenfranchising voters over trivial ballot-form errors and omissions—when the small, white, rural counties have been exposed as not doing so. For example, if you inadvertently leave your zip code off of your form in Cuyahoga, Franklin, Hamilton, Stark, or Lucas counties, you will be disenfranchisedeven if the board has no doubt regarding your eligibility, while Meigs and other small counties will count that same vote. How is that remotely fair? The court swept these undisputed, inconvenient facts in the record under the rug and did not even discuss them. The appeals court’s decision defies Bush v. Gore and its own prior precedent, and neuters the Voting Rights Act as well, which prohibits the disparate racial impact these practices represent.

The homeless coalitions do not understand how a judge—whose House-speaker husband the case accuses of leading racial discrimination, and constitutional and voting-rights violations—can feel free to participate in a court decision denying voting rights, or how this is the impartial justice our system promises.

Ohioans need to be incredibly vigilant when filling out absentee and provisional-ballot forms, because Secretary Husted is playing a game of disenfranchisement ‘gotcha’, rather than showing a devotion to counting every legitimate vote.

 While we are studying our Supreme Court options, hopes for affected Ohio voters in this close presidential election may well be lost. Voters may never learn that their ballots were not counted.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87282&title=6th%20Circuit%20Turns%20Down%20En%20Banc%20Consideration%20of%20OH%20Provisional%2FAbsentee%20Balloting%20Case&description=>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Justice Department significantly reducing number of federal observers stationed inside polling places”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87280>
Posted on October 7, 2016 8:10 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87280> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sari Horwitz f<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-severely-curtails-election-observers-inside-polling-places-this-november/2016/10/06/dfb49caa-875a-11e6-92c2-14b64f3d453f_story.html>or WaPo:

The Justice Department is significantly reducing the number of federal observers stationed inside polling places in next month’s election at the same time that voters will face strict new election laws in more than a dozen states.

These laws, including requirements to present certain kinds of photo identification, are expected to lead to disputes at the polls. Adding to the potential for confusion, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has called<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/13/how-donald-trumps-bizarre-voter-watch-effort-could-get-the-gop-in-trouble/> for his supporters to police the polls themselves for fraud.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D87280&title=%E2%80%9CJustice%20Department%20significantly%20reducing%20number%20of%20federal%20observers%20stationed%20inside%20polling%20places%E2%80%9D&description=>


--
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/20161008/53994ad1/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/20161008/53994ad1/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 142928 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161008/53994ad1/attachment-0001.png>