[EL] North Carolina ruling; more news

Fri Mar 17 15:59:28 PDT 2017

Baptist Standard: Texas Discrimination in Redistricting “Give[s] Jesus a Black Eye”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91665>
Posted on March 17, 2017 3:30 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91665> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Baptist Standard editorial:<https://www.baptiststandard.com/opinion/editorial/20078-editorial-how-can-texas-claim-to-be-righteous-and-embrace-injustice>
The common denominator of these rulings is an overt attempt to suppress voting by racial minorities, particularly African-Americans and Latinos.
What’s so embarrassing is the hypocrisy of it all. Texas prides itself on being one of the most religious—and down here, that pretty much means Christian—states in the nation. Our politicians often campaign, at least in part, on their devout faith. We make ourselves feel good by reminding ourselves, and others, of how much we love Jesus and how strictly we follow the Ten Commandments.
And yet, collectively, we lead the nation in suppressing the vote of racial and ethnic minorities. That action contradicts everything Jesus and the prophets said about how to treat our neighbors. When overtly religious people—and in our case, an entire culture—treat others dreadfully, not to mention illegally, we give Jesus a black eye.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91665&title=Baptist%20Standard%3A%20Texas%20Discrimination%20in%20Redistricting%20%E2%80%9CGive%5Bs%5D%20Jesus%20a%20Black%20Eye%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Breaking: NC Court Rejects Law Changing North Carolina Board of Elections to Help Republicans<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91663>
Posted on March 17, 2017 3:07 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91663> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
A unanimous three-judge North Carolina state court, in a 43-page decision here<http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccapitol/document/16591031/>, held that North Carolina’s attempt to change the nature of election boards in the state to help favor Republicans violates the state constitution. (The judges were not unanimous on other challenged laws.) It is a big win for voting rights.
There is little question that the Republican North Carolina legislature, facing a new Democratic governor, attempted to change the election laws for partisan reason. Under the existing law, the governor would have been able to have a majority on both the state election board and county boards. These boards have broken down on party lines on issues such as how much early voting to set (as noted in the court’s opinion). The new plan would have taken the Elections Board, broken it up into a separate elections and ethics board, given the legislature the power to appoint a number of the members, required that the members be equally divided among parties, given Republicans control of the boards in even-numbered (presidential and congressional) election years, and required that it would take a majority to do anything on the board. In the event of a partisan deadlock, default rules would kick in that would benefit Republicans, such as one early voting site per county, and only during business hours.
The court held that this power grab violated three provisions of the North Carolina state constitution (the separation of powers clause, the executive powers clause, and the faithful execution clause. The unanimous court relied heavily on an earlier case involving taking powers away from the former Governor, Pat McCrory.
The case can be appealed, but note that the state Supreme Court has a new Democratic majority, to the extent this issue breaks on party lines (it well may not break along these lines). I’ll have to leave to others who know NC state constitutional law better than I do to handicap what will happen further on appeal.
Another question is whether the Legislature, with a veto-proof majority, could make other changes to election rules which could undermine the governor or the Elections Board’s powers without running afoul of the state constitution.
One thing the legislature could do is something like cutting back directly on early voting through a state statute, something which would not require the action of the Elections Board. Sure the legislature could try that, but it would immediately be challenged in federal court as a Voting Rights Act and U.S. constitutional violation. And given the earlier findings in the NC voting case that the North Carolina legislature acted with racially discriminatory intent (a ruling that the Supreme Court will soon decide<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91625> whether to take up), it seems like a risky move. Indeed it is a move that could put North Carolina back under federal supervision of its voting rules.
Early stories via News and Observer<http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article139231588.html>, WRAL<http://www.wral.com/judges-deliver-split-decision-in-fight-between-cooper-lawmakers/16590961/>.
[This post has been updated.]
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91663&title=Breaking%3A%20NC%20Court%20Rejects%20Law%20Changing%20North%20Carolina%20Board%20of%20Elections%20to%20Help%20Republicans>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“In Emails, Neil Gorsuch Praised a Leading Republican Activist Behind Voter Suppression Efforts”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91661>
Posted on March 17, 2017 7:50 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91661> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ari Berman:<https://www.thenation.com/article/in-emails-neil-gorsuch-praised-a-leading-republican-activist-behind-voter-suppression-efforts/>
Few people in the Republican Party have done more to limit voting rights than Hans von Spakovsky<http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/29/the-voter-fraud-myth>. He’s been instrumental in spreading the myth of widespread voter fraud and backing new restrictions to make it harder to vote.
But it appears that von Spakovsky had an admirer in Neil Gorsuch, Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, according to emails released to the Senate Judiciary Committee covering Gorsuch’s time working in the George W. Bush Administration.
When President Bush nominated von Spakovksy to the Federal Election Commission in late 2005, Gorsuch wrote, “Good for Hans!”….
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91661&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Emails%2C%20Neil%20Gorsuch%20Praised%20a%20Leading%20Republican%20Activist%20Behind%20Voter%20Suppression%20Efforts%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“This is how to get rid of gerrymandered districts”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91659>
Posted on March 17, 2017 7:38 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91659> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ryan D. Williamson, Michael Crespin, Maxwell Palmer and Barry C. Edwards for The Monkey Cage:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/03/17/this-will-get-rid-of-gerrymandered-districts/?utm_term=.6f4a3fcb7bc2>
Overall, independent redistricting commissions have done a better job at avoiding gerrymandering, as measured by these three traditional criteria. As a result, districts drawn by independent commissions are likely to be less partisan and more competitive than districts drawn by state legislators.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91659&title=%E2%80%9CThis%20is%20how%20to%20get%20rid%20of%20gerrymandered%20districts%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>

“Law and Opinion in the de Blasio Investigation”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91657>
Posted on March 17, 2017 7:35 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91657> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2017/03/law-opinion-de-blasio-investigation/> critical of Vance.
Dwyer<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/nyregion/de-blasio-proves-that-some-laws-are-made-to-be-unbreakable.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fnyregion&action=click&contentCollection=nyregion&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0> critical of De Blaiso.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91657&title=%E2%80%9CLaw%20and%20Opinion%20in%20the%20de%20Blasio%20Investigation%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

“Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Skeptical Of Federal Agency Power”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91655>
Posted on March 17, 2017 7:30 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=91655> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nina Totenberg <http://www.npr.org/2017/03/17/520310365/trumps-supreme-court-nominee-skeptical-of-federal-agency-power> for NPR on Chevron deference:
At most Supreme Court confirmation hearings, questions focus on hot-button social issues — abortion, affirmative action, same-sex marriage — and the hearings next week on Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch will be no exception.
But senators are also likely to spend a lot of time examining the nominee’s views on federal regulations — of the environment, health and safety laws for workers, and laws on consumer rights and business.
In question is a doctrine that Gorsuch has criticized but that also once helped his mother.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D91655&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%E2%80%99s%20Supreme%20Court%20Nominee%20Skeptical%20Of%20Federal%20Agency%20Power%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

--
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
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/20170317/b842d0fa/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/20170317/b842d0fa/attachment.png>