[EL] Information as a thing of value

[Stuart McPhail]

One distinction is that the law only prohibits contributions - i.e.,  benefits conferred for the purpose of influencing an election. The hypos you (library, preexisting report, responding to questions) list would not consist of information conveyed for that purpose - so they're not prohibited by the law.  

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 16, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Hess, Doug <HESSDOUG at Grinnell.EDU> wrote:
> 
> I've seen articles (Tokaji at Just Security and another in the Post by Volokh) make the claim that if what Trump Jr did was illegal than any conversation by a campaign with a non-citizen or request of information from another government (i.e., asking how parental leave works in Norway) is illegal. 
> 
> Is there a judicial doctrine or legal reason why a court cannot distinguish between a foreign government or foreigners actively developing information for a campaign versus research by a campaign or requests for regular materials. Surely, using a public library or asking an official for a report that exists or interviewing non-citizens are substantially different from foreign governments or foreigners actively developing a set of information with a strategy for its use, etc. Especially, if that strategy was to favor one candidate and in the interests for a subversive strategy by foreign policy or intelligence agencies. 
> 
> Or is that distinction not at issue? 
> 
> Douglas R Hess
> Assistant Professor of Political Science
> Grinnell College
> 1210 Park Street, Carnegie Hall #309
> Grinnell, IA 50112 
> phone: 641-269-4383
> http://www.douglasrhess.com 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election