[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/17/17

Mon Oct 16 19:25:11 PDT 2017

“Menendez Trial Judge Rejects Motion to Dismiss the Case”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95488>
Posted on October 16, 2017 7:22 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95488> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/nyregion/menendez-corruption-trial-dismissal-denied.html?action=click&contentCollection=nyregion&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>
 The federal corruption trial of Senator Robert Menendez resumed Monday after a judge rejected a motion by the defense to dismiss the case<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/nyregion/menendez-trial-may-hinge-on-a-new-definition-of-bribery.html> based on a major Supreme Court decision last year<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/us/politics/supreme-court-bob-mcdonnell-virginia.html> that overturned the corruption conviction against a former Virginia governor.
“We are going to the jury,” Judge William H. Walls said, after reading a lengthy opinion in a courtroom here with the jurors out of the room.
Judge Walls had suggested last week<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/nyregion/menendez-corruption-trial-mcdonnell-ruling.html> that the Supreme Court decision might limit the “stream of benefits” theory of bribery, which is important to the Menendez case and holds that a bribe can occur if a person offers something of value to another person as a retainer, expecting favors over time, rather than a more straightforward quid pro quo exchange.
But on Monday, Judge Walls said that the ruling, which reversed the conviction of the former Gov. Bob McDonnell, did not eliminate the theory, in part because there was no explicit mention of the term in the high court’s decision.
“I see nothing in McDonnell that attacks the stream of benefits theory,” he said, adding later that in his view, the Supreme Court would not have made such a major ruling without explicitly making a finding about the theory.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95488&title=%E2%80%9CMenendez%20Trial%20Judge%20Rejects%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss%20the%20Case%E2%80%9D>
Posted in bribery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>

“Roy Moore’s Senate campaign blames Democrats for fake Twitter followers”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95486>
Posted on October 16, 2017 7:11 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95486> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Weigel:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/10/16/roy-moores-senate-campaign-gets-twitter-to-delete-thousands-of-fake-followers/?utm_term=.051498c29852>
Roy Moore, the Republican nominee for Senate in Alabama, gained then lost thousands of apparently fake Twitter followers in the space of a few hours — a situation that his campaign blamed on Democrats.
“We highly doubt that reporters across the country spend most of their free time on Sunday breaking away from church, family, and football to review the Twitter followers of various candidates across the country,” Moore’s campaign said in an emailed statement. “It is more likely that Doug Jones and Democrat operatives are pulling a political stunt on Twitter and alerting their friends in the media.”
The saga did begin on Sunday, when multiple Twitter users noticed that Moore’s account had nearly doubled its follower count, from slightly more than 26,000 to more than 47,000, in less than a week. At least 1,100 of the new followers had Russian names and Twitter bios, often consisting of pure gibberish such as “Master of Plastic Shackles” and “to be a little girl.”
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95486&title=%E2%80%9CRoy%20Moore%E2%80%99s%20Senate%20campaign%20blames%20Democrats%20for%20fake%20Twitter%20followers%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, social media and social protests<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=58>

“NC Senate votes to override election law veto”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95484>
Posted on October 16, 2017 7:07 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95484> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WRAL:<http://www.wral.com/nc-senate-votes-to-override-election-law-veto/17021277/>
The state Senate voted Monday night to override Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto of a measure that would cancel all judicial primary elections in 2018.
The House is expected to follow suit Tuesday, although that vote may be delayed.
Senate Bill 656<http://ncleg.net/Applications/BillLookUp/LoadBillDocument.aspx?SessionCode=2017&DocNum=5855&SeqNum=0> would also make it easier for third-party candidates to get on the ballot for statewide or municipal races, and for unaffiliated although not in legislative races. It would also lower the percentage of primary votes required to avoid a runoff.
Republican House and Senate leaders say<http://www.wral.com/lawmakers-plan-to-cancel-2018-judicial-primaries/16994979/> they’re cancelling the judicial primaries because they intend to redraw the state’s superior and district court districts by next spring, so the primary would likely be delayed.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95484&title=%E2%80%9CNC%20Senate%20votes%20to%20override%20election%20law%20veto%E2%80%9D>
Posted in judicial elections<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>

NV: “Republican-led efforts to recall three state senators hit with first lawsuit”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95482>
Posted on October 16, 2017 12:06 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95482> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nevada Independent:<https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/republican-led-efforts-to-recall-three-state-senators-hit-with-first-lawsuit>
Three campaigns to recall Nevada lawmakers have been hit with their first lawsuit, with plaintiffs arguing that the state doesn’t benefit from the recalls, that a special election would place an undue burden on voters and that the whole process undermines the hallmarks of the republican system.
Marc Elias<https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/professionals/marc-e-elias.html>, a nationally prominent attorney who served as former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s general counsel during the 2016 election, filed the suit Monday in federal court in Las Vegas with help from Bradley Schrager, a onetime attorney for the Nevada State Democratic Party. Defendants are Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske and Clark County Voter Registrar Joe Gloria, who would be tasked with carrying out a special election if the recall petitions qualify.
Read the complaint<https://www.scribd.com/document/361757912/Show-Temp-101617?irgwc=1&content=27795&campaign=VigLink&ad_group=3073860&keyword=ft500noi&source=impactradius&medium=affiliate#from_embed>.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95482&title=NV%3A%20%E2%80%9CRepublican-led%20efforts%20to%20recall%20three%20state%20senators%20hit%20with%20first%20lawsuit%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Efforts to pry loose Trump tax returns hit a wall”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95480>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:48 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95480> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico:<http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/16/trump-tax-returns-release-efforts-stall-243819>
Efforts to pry loose President Donald Trump’s tax returns at the state level have hit a wall, stalling in statehouses across the country including in California, a hotbed of anti-Trump resistance.
Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed legislation late Sunday that would have forced presidential candidates to make their tax returns public before appearing on the California ballot, marking the death there of a measure once ballyhooed by Democrats and open government advocates as an end-run to Trump’s refusal to disclose his tax filings.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95480&title=%E2%80%9CEfforts%20to%20pry%20loose%20Trump%20tax%20returns%20hit%20a%20wall%E2%80%9D>
Posted in ballot access<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

J.H. Snider Wants to Get New Yorkers Ready for a State Constitutional Convention<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95478>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:42 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95478> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Read.<http://cityandstateny.com/articles/opinion/new-york-constitutional-convetion-debate.html>
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95478&title=J.H.%20Snider%20Wants%20to%20Get%20New%20Yorkers%20Ready%20for%20a%20State%20Constitutional%20Convention>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“New York Inches Its Way Toward Easier Ballot Access”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95476>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95476> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Goldfeder and Perez<http://www.stroock.com/siteFiles/Publications/BallotAccessNYLJ.pdf> write for the NYLJ.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95476&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20York%20Inches%20Its%20Way%20Toward%20Easier%20Ballot%20Access%E2%80%9D>
Posted in ballot access<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>

“Do Seattle’s democracy vouchers work? New analysis says yes”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95474>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:33 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95474> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Seattle Times:<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/do-seattles-democracy-vouchers-work-new-analysis-says-yes/>
The program went into effect this year, and it’s had a bit of a bumpy start. One City Council candidate has been accused<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/seattle-candidate-accused-of-defrauding-democracy-voucher-program/> of defrauding the program. A libertarian-leaning group has sued<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/lawsuit-challenges-seattle-campaign-democracy-vouchers/>, saying the program violates the First Amendment. And a Seattle Times analysis<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattles-democracy-vouchers-havent-kept-big-money-out-of-primary-election/> showed that the vouchers haven’t gotten big money out of politics, as some proponents claimed they would.
 But a new, early look at donor-participation statistics shows that the democracy voucher program does appear to live up to its name — that is, it is helping to democratize political giving in Seattle by diversifying the donor pool to better reflect Seattle residents.
The data analysis was performed by two liberal political-advocacy nonprofits: Seattle-based Win/Win<http://winwinnetwork.org/> and Washington, D.C.-based Every Voice<http://www.everyvoicecenter.org/>. Both groups were major contributors to the Initiative 122 “Honest Elections Seattle” campaign that established the voucher program.
Voucher donations, just like all donations, are public record, so researchers know precisely who used the program. They worked up a demographic profile of the nearly 11,000 Seattleites who used vouchers through the Aug. 1 primaries. The vouchers could be used in three races — the City Council’s two citywide seats and for city attorney.
The vouchers are not yet accepted for the mayor’s race, and the researchers took advantage of the fact. They used that donation pool as a sort of control group, which could be compared with the people who used vouchers in other races this year.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95474&title=%E2%80%9CDo%20Seattle%E2%80%99s%20democracy%20vouchers%20work%3F%20New%20analysis%20says%20yes%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Want to deepen our democracy? Get ready.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95472>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:31 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95472> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
E.J. Dionne:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-deepen-our-democracy-get-ready/2017/10/15/f0c2347a-b040-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html?utm_term=.240d49ecd885>
This is why the recent introduction of the “We the People” Democracy Reform Act of 2017 <https://www.tomudall.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/WE%20THE%20PEOPLE%20DEMOCRACY%20REFORM%20ACT%20SUMMARY.pdf> by Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.) and Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) could prove to be an important milestone even if the conflict-of-interest maven who occupies the White House and the Republicans who currently dominate Congress choose to ignore it.
The bill is a compendium of ideas aimed at fixing particular problems in our political system. But its comprehensiveness underscores that the republican form of our government is being undermined by the rising power of oligarchic big money in politics and the increasingly unrepresentative nature of our institutions.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95472&title=%E2%80%9CWant%20to%20deepen%20our%20democracy%3F%20Get%20ready.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Of Aliens, Money and Politics: Should Foreign Political Donations Be Banned?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95470>
Posted on October 16, 2017 11:28 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=95470> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Joo-Cheong Tham has posted this interesting draft <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3048611> on SSRN (forthcoming Kings Law Journal). A snippet:
Against premise 1), I argue that non-citizenship and the inability to vote are not sufficient grounds for exclusion from the political community. Against premise 2), I point to other bases for residents of a country being able to legitimately influence its political process (even when not members of its political community): human rights, in particular the rights of political expression and association, and being subject to the laws of the country. I also argue that the ‘foreignness’ of corporate political donations does not pose any additional danger to democracy unless the corporation is an agent for a foreign government. The article concludes that there is just cause for banning political donations from foreign governments and those being sourced from overseas, but any further measures in relation to ‘foreign’ political donations should be approached cautiously. Rather than focus on the ‘foreignness’ of the political donations, the article concludes that the underlying risks stem more from the ‘corporateness’ of these donations, pointing to general measures to deal with large political donations rather than specific regulation of ‘foreign’ political donations.
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D95470&title=%E2%80%9COf%20Aliens%2C%20Money%20and%20Politics%3A%20Should%20Foreign%20Political%20Donations%20Be%20Banned%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

--
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/20171017/f5de9db1/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/20171017/f5de9db1/attachment.png>