[EL] ELB News and Commentary 12/3/18

Mon Dec 3 09:08:05 PST 2018

“Changes to early voting, Wisconsin presidential primary would cost taxpayers millions under GOP plan”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102586>
Posted on December 3, 2018 9:02 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102586> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Patrick Marley<https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/12/03/lame-duck-changes-presidential-primary-voting-laws-cost-millions/2190767002/> for the Journal-Sentinel:

Voting changes Republican lawmakers are considering passing Tuesday would cost taxpayers millions of dollars — and perhaps far more than believed just a few days ago.

In their lame-duck session, GOP lawmakers hope to limit early voting to two weeks and move the 2020 presidential primary from April to March, causing the state to hold three elections instead of two that spring.

Moving the presidential primary will cost about $7 million, according to the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

But the restriction on early voting could add even more costs because the state is sure to face a legal challenge over it if it passes. A similar lawsuit was struck down by U.S. District Judge James Peterson, who found the limit was unconstitutional because it was aimed at helping Republicans by deterring minorities from voting.

If the state loses on the issue, taxpayers would likely have to pay the attorney fees for those bringing the case.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102586&title=%E2%80%9CChanges%20to%20early%20voting%2C%20Wisconsin%20presidential%20primary%20would%20cost%20taxpayers%20millions%20under%20GOP%20plan%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“RED FLAGS: Many Warnings Before Election Night Problems In Porter County, IN”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102584>
Posted on December 3, 2018 8:55 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102584> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Doug Chapin blogs.<http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2018/12/03/red-flags-many-warnings-before-election-night-problems-in-porter-county-in/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102584&title=%E2%80%9CRED%20FLAGS%3A%20Many%20Warnings%20Before%20Election%20Night%20Problems%20In%20Porter%20County%2C%20IN%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“Georgia group can prove illegal voter purge by Kemp, leader says”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102582>
Posted on December 3, 2018 8:53 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102582> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jon Ward:<https://ca.style.yahoo.com/georgia-group-can-prove-illegal-voter-purge-kemp-leader-says-100002969.html>

The leader of a group formed by Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams says it can prove that voters were illegally removed from state rolls over the past few years by the office of former Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who defeated Abrams in a close race for governor.

“We now have individuals who we have worked with and identified who were erroneously caught up in this,” said Lauren Groh-Wargo, CEO of Fair Fight Action. Abrams established the organization after losing to Kemp by 55,000 votes<https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/91639/Web02-state.221451/#/> out of 3.9 million cast.

“We’re going to be able to prove for the first time I think that [Kemp’s] purges were actually illegal,” Groh-Wargo said in an interview for the Yahoo News podcast “The Long Game.”<https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-long-game/id1248994688?mt=2>

“We did not believe they were being done legally, but we didn’t have enough to prove it. And I believe we do now have enough to show and prove in court that he was purging at a scale that was illegal,” said Groh-Wargo, who was Abrams’s campaign manager.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102582&title=%E2%80%9CGeorgia%20group%20can%20prove%20illegal%20voter%20purge%20by%20Kemp%2C%20leader%20says%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

“Missouri first to adopt fairness test against gerrymandering”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102580>
Posted on December 3, 2018 8:39 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102580> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP:<https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/missouri-first-to-adopt-fairness-test-against-gerrymandering/>

Other states have created independent commissions and required bipartisan votes to redraw legislative and congressional districts. Missouri will be the first to rely on a new mathematical formula to try to engineer “partisan fairness” and “competitiveness” in its state legislative districts; the Legislature will continue drawing the state’s congressional districts.

An Associated Press analysis of the new Missouri formula shows it has the potential to end the Republicans’ supermajorities in the state House and state Senate and move the chambers closer to the more even partisan division that is often reflected in statewide races. But the size of the likely Democratic gains remains uncertain, partly because the formula has never been put to a test.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102580&title=%E2%80%9CMissouri%20first%20to%20adopt%20fairness%20test%20against%20gerrymandering%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>

“The Trailer: Georgia’s high-stakes, low-profile runoff is Tuesday. Do Democrats care?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102578>
Posted on December 2, 2018 4:04 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102578> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Weigel.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/paloma/the-trailer/2018/12/02/the-trailer-georgia-s-high-stakes-low-profile-runoff-is-tuesday-do-democrats-care/5c03d2a61b326b60d12800cf/?utm_term=.a5bcbcdf958a>

Georgia’s runoff system, which forces a second round of voting if no candidate cracks 50 percent in November, has tended to help Republicans. In 2008, powered by turnout for Barack Obama’s candidacy, Democrats got into the runoff for a Senate seat, then failed to show up for their candidate, a moderate. Democratic turnout tumbled by 48 percent; Republican turnout declined by just 34 percent. This year, they are being asked to support Barrow, a former congressman whose final campaigns (he lost in 2014) advertised how frequently he opposed Obama on the floor. While Barrow has criticized the state’s handling of the Nov. 6 election, he has mostly avoided the galvanizing language of Abrams.

In digital ads, Barrow’s campaign appeals to voters who are “outraged at the recent voter suppression tactics in our state’s elections” and “fed up with politicians who enable our fellow citizens to be disenfranchised.” But in higher-profile settings, Barrow doesn’t go there. He tends to focus on Republican Brad Raffensperger’s tax debts<https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/georgia-secretary-state-candidate-offers-explanation-for-tax-debts/84W60wBTdPdmgTZfYqvUXM/> and pitch himself as an efficient manager who’d oversee less chaotic elections.

“I’m the candidate for fiscal conservatives, for independents and libertarians,” said Barrow this week at a forum in Atlanta, highlighting his endorsement from the defeated Libertarian candidate. “I’m the only candidate in this race who’s called for the decertification of the machines used in this race.”

Raffensperger, by contrast, has spent the runoff stoking Republican worries that undoing any of Kemp’s policies would risk the integrity of Georgia’s elections. In an ad, he highlights Barrow’s congressional opposition to a Republican-backed voter ID bill and warns that Barrow would enable “more illegal voting than ever,” though Kemp’s office had said<https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/illegal-votes-georgia-officials-say/c7Wl7RyEgMTQyK2R8PtZ2K/> there was no illegal voting whatsoever in 2016. Republican voters, concentrated in whiter and more rural counties, reported few problems on Election Day this year, so Raffensperger gets receptive audiences when he asks if Barrow would blow up a system that works.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102578&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Trailer%3A%20Georgia%E2%80%99s%20high-stakes%2C%20low-profile%20runoff%20is%20Tuesday.%20Do%20Democrats%20care%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Wisconsin: “Tony Evers says he will ‘take any steps possible’ to prevent GOP plan to take away his power”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102576>
Posted on December 2, 2018 3:49 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102576> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:<https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/02/tony-evers-says-he-take-any-steps-possible-prevent-gop-plan-take-away-his-power/2181201002/>

Gov.-elect Tony Evers said he “will take any steps possible” to prevent Republican lawmakers from removing key powers from his new administration.

Republican lawmakers are to hold a hearing Monday on a sweeping plan to weaken his authority. Both chambers could vote to approve the measures Tuesday.

“I view this as a repudiation of the last election. I will take any steps possible to assure the people of Wisconsin that I will not invalidate those votes,” Evers told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in an interview Saturday. “And frankly, I’m encouraging citizens across the state of Wisconsin to help me in that effort.”

Following the defeat of Gov. Scott Walker in the Nov. 6 election, Republican lawmakers have put forward a slate of legislation that would provide more power to the state Legislature and prevent Evers from having authority over key areas of state government.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102576&title=Wisconsin%3A%20%E2%80%9CTony%20Evers%20says%20he%20will%20%E2%80%98take%20any%20steps%20possible%E2%80%99%20to%20prevent%20GOP%20plan%20to%20take%20away%20his%20power%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Allegations of G.O.P. Election Fraud Shake North Carolina’s Ninth District”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102574>
Posted on December 2, 2018 3:42 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102574> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Helpful New Yorker update.<https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/allegations-of-gop-election-fraud-shake-north-carolinas-ninth-district>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102574&title=%E2%80%9CAllegations%20of%20G.O.P.%20Election%20Fraud%20Shake%20North%20Carolina%E2%80%99s%20Ninth%20District%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Amidst social media controversy, NC Board of Elections chair resigns”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102572>
Posted on December 2, 2018 3:01 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102572> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News and Observer<https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article222495590.html>:

The chairman of the North Carolina State Board of Elections announced Saturday he is resigning amidst a controversy over his social media and an ongoing investigation into alleged voter fraud in the 9th Congressional District race.

Andy Penry stepped down as leader of the nine-person board, effective immediately. In a statement to The News & Observer, he said he is doing so on his own accord because it’s in “the best interest of the investigation.”

“The investigation of criminal conduct and absentee voting fraud in the 2018 Republican primary and 2018 general election in Congressional District 9 is a matter of vital importance to our democracy,” he said in his statement. “The investigation should be free of attempts at distraction and obstruction so that the truth can be revealed. I will not allow myself to be used as an instrument of distraction in this investigation.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102572&title=%E2%80%9CAmidst%20social%20media%20controversy%2C%20NC%20Board%20of%20Elections%20chair%20resigns%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Michigan: “Dispute over Republican-drawn district maps will go to trial”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102570>
Posted on December 2, 2018 2:56 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102570> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP:<https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/30/gerrymandering-lawsuit-trial/2168543002/>

A three-judge panel has cleared the way for a trial that could upset districts in the Michigan Legislature and the state’s congressional delegation.

The panel says Democrats so far have presented sufficient evidence that districts were shaped by Republican operatives to guarantee the GOP’s dominance after the 2010 census, especially in the Legislature. The lawsuit alleges that constitutional rights were violated when Democratic areas were packed in certain districts or spread among many districts to dilute their influence.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102570&title=Michigan%3A%20%E2%80%9CDispute%20over%20Republican-drawn%20district%20maps%20will%20go%20to%20trial%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>

“In Donald Trump’s Census, Who Counts?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102566>
Posted on November 30, 2018 12:08 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102566> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Emily Bazelon<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/28/magazine/donald-trump-census.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fmagazine&action=click&contentCollection=magazine&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront> for NYT Magazine.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102566&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Donald%20Trump%E2%80%99s%20Census%2C%20Who%20Counts%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Republicans Are Casting Doubt On Normal Election Processes For The Sake Of Winning”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102564>
Posted on November 30, 2018 12:05 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102564> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sam Levine<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/florida-recount-voter-fraud_us_5bea0432e4b044bbb1a7927c?utm_source=reddit.com> for HuffPost.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102564&title=%E2%80%9CRepublicans%20Are%20Casting%20Doubt%20On%20Normal%20Election%20Processes%20For%20The%20Sake%20Of%20Winning%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>

Lame Duck Wisconsin Legislature May Cut Early Voting Before Democratic Governor Comes In, But Such Legislation May Be Barred by Existing Court Order<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102562>
Posted on November 30, 2018 12:01 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102562> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/953061991442153488/TPXUplBR_bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley>
<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley>
Patrick Marley<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley>
✔@patrickdmarley<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley>

<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1068595147414429696>

Republican lawmakers hope to hold a hearing Monday and vote Tuesday on bills moving Wisconsin's presidential primary, limiting the new governor's power and paring back early voting.

They have yet to make these bills (and others under consideration) public.
<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1068595147414429696>
1,321<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1068595147414429696>
11:58 AM - Nov 30, 2018<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1068595147414429696>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1068595147414429696>
1,701 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1068595147414429696>

Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1027236869476573184/PFqQJu6__bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
Rick Hasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
✔@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

 · Nov 30, 2018<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1068586962381168640>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1068586962381168640>

Wisconsin
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1466064752/EP3_bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/EPWisco>
<https://twitter.com/EPWisco>
EPWisco at EPWisco<https://twitter.com/EPWisco>

Q: would the court injunction in the One Wisconsin Institute case, which invalidated early voting restrictions, apply? That decision was NOT stayed by the 7th circuit.
<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1068593863865053185>
1<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1068593863865053185>
11:53 AM - Nov 30, 2018<https://twitter.com/EPWisco/status/1068593863865053185>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://twitter.com/EPWisco>
See EPWisco's other Tweets<https://twitter.com/EPWisco>

Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>

Update: It sounds like the new measure imposes different early voting rules than the old rules, which suggests that the existing court order would not bar any new provision.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102562&title=Lame%20Duck%20Wisconsin%20Legislature%20May%20Cut%20Early%20Voting%20Before%20Democratic%20Governor%20Comes%20In%2C%20But%20Such%20Legislation%20May%20Be%20Barred%20by%20Existing%20Court%20Order>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Supreme Court Will Consider Whether to Take Major Montana Campaign Contributions Case at Its January 4 Conference, A Case Which Could Pave the Way for Killing Federal Campaign Contribution Limits<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102560>
Posted on November 30, 2018 11:30 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102560> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

According to the docket. <https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-149.html>

It could also be when the Court considers whether to take the Austin campaign finance case.<https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-93.html>

As I wrote in Slate<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaughs-supreme-court-tenure-could-mean-the-end-of-all-campaign-finance-limits.html> back in September:

As Common Cause’s Steve Spaulding notes<https://twitter.com/SteveESpaulding/status/1035928229620731905>, “Kavanaugh himself acknowledges in the docs that he’s far outside the mainstream here.” The documents reveal a person who is deeply skeptical of even the most basic campaign finance limits, the ones that say a wealthy person cannot simply write a $100 million check to a candidate to run for office. (Lest you think that amount is fanciful, it is less than the amount that casino magnate Sheldon Adelson<https://www.propublica.org/article/how-much-did-sheldon-adelson-really-spend-on-campaign-2012> and the Koch Brothers network<https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/27/koch-brothers-network-to-spend-400-million-in-midterm-election-cycle.html> have spent in recent elections, and Trump impeachment advocate Tom Steyer has spent nearly that much<https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topindivs.php?cycle=2016&view=fc> in the past.) The inequality of influence and corruption and its appearance that could stem from such a system is profound.

And yet this could well be the direction in which we are heading. Right now pending before the court is a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to review Montana’s campaign contribution limits. The issue in the 9thCircuit case of Lair v. Motl<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-149/55981/20180731100706801_Lair%20Cert%20Petition%20Final.pdf> may seem a bit esoteric; it concerns how much evidence of corruption a state must produce to support a campaign contribution limit. But make no mistake: The Lair case, brought by Citizens United brainchild Jim Bopp, builds upon Chief Justice Roberts’ McCutcheon decision to argue for a standard that would lead courts to strike down virtually all contribution limits.

The court is also considering petition from opponents of city-level campaign contribution limits in Austin, Texas. Although a 5th Circuit panel upheld Austin’s limits in Zimmerman v. City of Austin<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-93/54548/20180717163422707_Zimmerman%20Petition.pdf>, newly confirmed Judge Jim Ho wrote a strong dissent from the entire 5thCircuit’s decision not to rehear the case. Ho, a former clerk of campaign finance law opponent Justice Clarence Thomas, issued a screed<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=98733> arguing that all campaign finance laws<https://www.npr.org/2018/07/26/632005799/legal-opinions-or-political-commentary-a-new-judge-exemplifies-the-trump-era?sc=17&f=1001&utm_source=iosnewsapp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=app> violate the First Amendment and people who don’t like big money in politics should simply shrink the size of government so the government doesn’t have a lot of goodies to give away.

Neither Lair nor Zimmerman directly call the federal $2,700 campaign finance limit into question, but either or both cases could be the vehicle to create a precedent that would compel federal courts to strike down the $2,700 limit. It could even happen before the 2020 election. And because this is a constitutional ruling, there would be precious little that Congress could do about it (not that Mitch McConnell, who has helped engineer these events, from supporting the relevant lawsuits to blocking Merrick Garland and shoving Kavanaugh through the Senate without a full document release, would want to do anything but pop open a bottle of Champagne).
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102560&title=Supreme%20Court%20Will%20Consider%20Whether%20to%20Take%20Major%20Montana%20Campaign%20Contributions%20Case%20at%20Its%20January%204%20Conference%2C%20A%20Case%20Which%20Could%20Pave%20the%20Way%20for%20Killing%20Federal%20Campaign%20Contribution%20Limits>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“NC board again declines to certify Mark Harris victory as mail-in ballots questioned”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102558>
Posted on November 30, 2018 11:14 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102558> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Charlotte Observer reports.<https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article222436915.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102558&title=%E2%80%9CNC%20board%20again%20declines%20to%20certify%20Mark%20Harris%20victory%20as%20mail-in%20ballots%20questioned%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

As Democrats Gain Control Over Election Arenas, Republican Legislative Bodies (Some Lame Duck) Consider Removing Their Jurisdiction or Power<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102556>
Posted on November 30, 2018 6:25 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102556> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

It may be happening in Michigan<https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/status/1068268244426006529> to incoming Democratic SOS Jocelyn Benson, in Arizona<https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/democratic-maricopa-county-elections-recorder-under-fire-republicans> to Maricopa County recorder Adrian Fontes, and in Wisconsin<https://www.apnews.com/2f28ee1f0c5249e3bbf3515f58c8b299> to take away incoming Democratic governor Tony Evers’ role in approving the next round of redistricting.

It’s the North Carolina playbook.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102556&title=As%20Democrats%20Gain%20Control%20Over%20Election%20Arenas%2C%20Republican%20Legislative%20Bodies%20(Some%20Lame%20Duck)%20Consider%20Removing%20Their%20Jurisdiction%20or%20Power>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

--
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/>
[signature_494399856]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181203/b319a64b/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/20181203/b319a64b/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2795 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181203/b319a64b/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2973 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181203/b319a64b/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 16298 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181203/b319a64b/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 25207 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181203/b319a64b/attachment-0001.png>