[EL] ProlifRic(k)

[Steve Hoersting]

Rick,

I am surprised -- but by now shouldn't be -- that you already have a draft
on SSRN regarding the latest developments in the concerted push to
"national-securitize" campaign finance law.(Not casting any aspersions in
suggesting "collusion," I am just saying I could make a circumstantial case
for it). I look forward to reading it.

Reformers can be counted on to exploit every opening -- and the remaining
openings, it's long been an open secret, are disclosure and Bluman.

I also want to thank you -- but should be wary of doing so -- for adding
"Libertarian-" to the descriptor of the pro-speech jurists. On behalf of
the long-suffering litigants, I appreciate the
close-enough-for-government-work credit you've provided; I'm sure we all
do. (Though, to tell you the truth, I prefer, in this context, a name you
won't give us in this context, for the same reason you've given us any name
at all in this context. The preferred name? "Constitutional Conservatives").

At the same time, I think we all see the "Libertarian-" nomenclature as a
bid to praise CJ Roberts to the point of splitting him from his colleagues
in CU. (I infer you even hold out hope for J. Kennedy on this point).

I wish I could say your attempt(s) will be in vain. But I cannot. For I
recall what Dahlia and the crew did to the relationship between Roberts and
the late Scalia in NFIB.

So keep pitching; we admire it. And we'll do our best to counter you... for
the sake open debate in a free society.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Steve

Sent from my Phone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20171120/bf4cb2ee/attachment.html>