[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/9/17

Mon May 8 19:52:58 PDT 2017

WI Partisan Gerrymandering Plaintiffs File #SCOTUS Motion to Affirm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92437>
Posted on May 8, 2017 4:32 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92437> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
With Paul Smith<https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/sites/default/files/2017-05-08%2520-%2520Whitford%2520Appellees%2520Motion%2520to%2520Affirm.pdf> (now of the Campaign Legal Center) as Counsel of Record.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92437&title=WI%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Plaintiffs%20File%20%23SCOTUS%20Motion%20to%20Affirm>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“Karen Handel said it should ‘boil your blood’ that registration is temporarily reopened in Georgia’s sixth district.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92433>
Posted on May 8, 2017 11:14 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92433> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Oh my.<https://thinkprogress.org/georgia-registration-order-5b8b12f30fbb>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92433&title=%E2%80%9CKaren%20Handel%20said%20it%20should%20%E2%80%98boil%20your%20blood%E2%80%99%20that%20registration%20is%20temporarily%20reopened%20in%20Georgia%E2%80%99s%20sixth%20district.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, NVRA (motor voter)<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“The Voting Rights Act May Be Coming Back From the Dead”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92428>
Posted on May 8, 2017 8:11 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92428> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Pema Levy<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/supreme-court-voting-rights-texas> for Mother Jones.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92428&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20May%20Be%20Coming%20Back%20From%20the%20Dead%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“President Trump seizes on election rules to push his agenda in new ways”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92426>
Posted on May 8, 2017 7:02 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92426> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Fredreka Schouten<https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/07/president-donald-trump-uses-election-laws-to-push-agenda/101262288/> for USA Today:
President Trump has headlined four big rallies in the first months of his presidency to tout his agenda and savage his foes. A new $1.5 million television ad campaign promotes his accomplishments and attacks the media.
The flurry of activity to build support for Trump’s policies isn’t organized by the White House but springs from his re-election campaign<https://www.donaldjtrump.com/>, which filed paperwork allowing him to begin raising and spending money on Jan. 20 — the same day he took the oath of office. By contrast, both President Obama and President George W. Bush had been in office for more than two years before they filed for re-election.
Traditionally, presidents use federal money to push their policies and refrain from overtly political activity until later in their terms. But Trump’s unorthodox move to immediately start fundraising allows him to capitalize on federal election laws to push his agenda in new ways. He can rally his supporters, openly denounce his political enemies and pressure recalcitrant lawmakers in Congress — all without running afoul of rules that bar using taxpayer money for politics.
Trump’s perpetual campaign operation is another sign of the ways the billionaire president is upending political norms.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92426&title=%E2%80%9CPresident%20Trump%20seizes%20on%20election%20rules%20to%20push%20his%20agenda%20in%20new%20ways%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“In Texas, almost all non-voters have a photo ID — but few understand the voter identification rules”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92423>
Posted on May 8, 2017 6:50 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92423> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Renée Cross, Jim Granato and Mark P. Jones for the Monkey Cage<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/08/in-texas-almost-everyone-has-a-photo-id-but-few-understand-the-voting-rules/?utm_term=.12ceae32b651>:
We conducted surveys in Texas earlier this year to investigate these arguments. Our study<http://www.uh.edu/class/hobby/voterid2016/voterid2016.pdf> found that virtually all eligible non-voters — that is, people who could have but didn’t vote — possessed a valid photo ID. But not many really understood the photo ID regulations….
The survey asked our non-voters to listen to three statements and tell us which one most accurately described Texas’s photo ID requirements for voting in November 2016. Only one in five picked the right statement: 21 percent in Harris County and 18 percent in CD-23.
Three out of five non-voters in both jurisdictions (58 percent and 60 percent) believed — wrongly — that all voters had to show a state-approved photo ID to vote in person. That wasn’t true. In fact, people with no photo ID could still vote as long as they signed an affidavit and showed one of several supporting documents, such as a bank statement, government check, paycheck, utility bill or voter registration certificate…..
Overall, Latinos were significantly less likely to understand the rules correctly than were other groups. In both places, only 15 percent of Latino non-voters understood the photo ID rule in contrast to 24 percent of Anglos and 28 percent of African Americans in Harris County. (CD-23 doesn’t have enough African American non-voters for a statistically valid sample.) Latinos also were significantly more likely to say the photo ID rules were more restrictive than they actually were.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92423&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Texas%2C%20almost%20all%20non-voters%20have%20a%20photo%20ID%20%E2%80%94%20but%20few%20understand%20the%20voter%20identification%20rules%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

“Why did Trump win? More whites — and fewer blacks — actually voted.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92421>
Posted on May 8, 2017 6:48 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92421> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bernard L. Fraga, Sean McElwee, Jesse Rhodes and Brian Schaffner for the Monkey Cage:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/08/why-did-trump-win-more-whites-and-fewer-blacks-than-normal-actually-voted/?utm_term=.d944c8f79c5b>
Using data from the voter file vendor Catalist<https://www.catalist.us/> and information from the U.S. Census Bureau, we examine the change in turnout rates for different racial/ethnic groups between 2012 and 2016. Black turnout declined dramatically; white turnout increased noticeably; and Latino and Asian American turnout went up even more. In the key swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, those shifts were especially strong. How strong? Without those shifts in turnout from various racial and ethnic groups, these pivotal states might have gone not to Trump but to Clinton — giving Clinton an electoral college victory.
Michael McDonald suggests <https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/861570580243517440> caution with these data, at least as to Michigan.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D92421&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20did%20Trump%20win%3F%20More%20whites%20%E2%80%94%20and%20fewer%20blacks%20%E2%80%94%20actually%20voted.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, voting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=31>

--
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/20170509/45864db7/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/20170509/45864db7/attachment.png>