[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/25/18

[Rick Hasen]

“Outrage in Wisconsin as Republicans Fire State’s Top Ethics and Election Officials”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97131>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:32 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97131> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Alan Greenblatt reports<http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-wisconsin-republicans-ethics-election-officials.html> for Governing.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97131&title=%E2%80%9COutrage%20in%20Wisconsin%20as%20Republicans%20Fire%20State%E2%80%99s%20Top%20Ethics%20and%20Election%20Officials%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Democratic group will spend $5 million to elect secretaries of state, the latest front in ‘voting wars’”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97128>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:27 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97128> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Dave Weigel for WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2018/01/25/democratic-group-will-spend-5-million-to-elect-secretaries-of-state-the-latest-front-in-voting-wars/?utm_term=.a1eb0add0dd2>

The left-leaning ballot access group iVote will spend at least $5 million across swing states to elect Democratic secretaries of state — the latest front in the “voting wars” that Democrats worried they have been losing.

“Republicans have understood the importance of the office,” said iVote president and founder, Ellen Kurz. “There isn’t a single Democratic swing state secretary of state. And dozens of states have taken away opportunities to vote, purged voter rolls and disenfranchised certain voters every year.”

This year, iVote will focus on electing Democrats as the chief election officials in seven swing states: Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, and Ohio. Only one of those states, New Mexico, has a Democratic secretary of state.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97128&title=%E2%80%9CDemocratic%20group%20will%20spend%20%245%20million%20to%20elect%20secretaries%20of%20state%2C%20the%20latest%20front%20in%20%E2%80%98voting%20wars%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Who’s against limiting money’s power in D.C. politics? Perhaps the Democratic mayor.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97126>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:26 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97126> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/whos-against-campaign-finance-reform-perhaps-dcs-democratic-mayor/2018/01/24/5ae227c6-0126-11e8-9d31-d72cf78dbeee_story.html?utm_term=.194184759aed>


[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97126&title=%E2%80%9CWho%E2%80%99s%20against%20limiting%20money%E2%80%99s%20power%20in%20D.C.%20politics%3F%20Perhaps%20the%20Democratic%20mayor.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“We Drew 2,568 Congressional Districts By Hand. Here’s How.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97122>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:18 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97122> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

538:<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/we-drew-2568-congressional-districts-by-hand-heres-how/?ex_cid=story-twitter>

In most states<http://www.ncsl.org/research/redistricting/2009-redistricting-commissions-table.aspx>, district maps — which define where the constituency of one representative ends and that of another begins — are drawn by the state’s lawmakers. Having politicians define their own districts has not gone entirely smoothly — and two cases involving political gerrymandering, or the drawing of districts (especially oddly shaped districts<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/15/americas-most-gerrymandered-congressional-districts/?utm_term=.a53c4b9519a2>) to favor one party over another, are now before the U.S. Supreme Court<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2017/12/08/4fde65f4-dc66-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.9e33701fefc2>.

But if gerrymandering is a bad way to draw districts, what happens when you try other ways? At FiveThirtyEight, we’ve been exploring this and other questions in “The Gerrymandering Project<https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/the-gerrymandering-project/>.”

As part of this project, we set out to determine what districts for the U.S. House of Representatives could look like if they were drawn with different goals in mind. We did the drawing ourselves … 258 state congressional maps, or 2,568 districts, sketched out over the course of months, with the indispensable help of one developer’s free online redistricting tool<http://gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/launchapp.html>….

And see Dave Wasserman’s Hating Gerrymandering Is Easy. Fixing It Is Harder.<https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hating-gerrymandering-is-easy-fixing-it-is-harder/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97122&title=%E2%80%9CWe%20Drew%202%2C568%20Congressional%20Districts%20By%20Hand.%20Here%E2%80%99s%20How.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


Pennsylvania Plaintiffs, in Opposition to Stay Request in Partisan Gerrymandering Case in State Supreme Court, Lay Down Case Against SCOTUS Review<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97120>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:15 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97120> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Interesting discussion<https://www.pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2018-01-25-Petitioners-Answer-to-Applications-for-Stay.pdf> of the Elections Clause issue I flagged here.<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97047>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97120&title=Pennsylvania%20Plaintiffs%2C%20in%20Opposition%20to%20Stay%20Request%20in%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Case%20in%20State%20Supreme%20Court%2C%20Lay%20Down%20Case%20Against%20SCOTUS%20Review>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Gerrymandering’s Moment of Reckoning”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97118>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:10 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97118> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sam Baker<https://www.axios.com/gerrymanderings-moment-of-reckoning-1516834187-8791817f-5b80-474c-832b-d05e585d14cd.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=&stream=top-stories> for Axios.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97118&title=%E2%80%9CGerrymandering%E2%80%99s%20Moment%20of%20Reckoning%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Judge tosses 7 of 18 counts against Menendez and Melgen”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97116>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:08 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97116> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico:<https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/24/robert-menendez-salomon-melgen-judge-strikes-counts-365473>

A federal judge has acquitted Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez and co-defendant Salomon Melgen on seven of the 18 counts they were tried on last year, just days after the Justice Department announced its intent to try the duo again after the jury deadlocked in the first trial.

U.S. District Court Judge William Walls, who came under criticism from Menendez also announced he will not preside over the retrial. The case has not been assigned to another judge yet, nor has a trial date been set.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97116&title=%E2%80%9CJudge%20tosses%207%20of%2018%20counts%20against%20Menendez%20and%20Melgen%E2%80%9D>
Posted in bribery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>


“Voter Discrimination and Deliberative Democracy in the Technological Era”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97114>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:06 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97114> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Benjamin Wilson has posted this draft<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3066108> on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In structuring its constitution, the United States (“US”) put tremendous weight into the idea of giving future generations a government whose form and function can meet societal challenges. Thomas Jefferson, in one of his famous letters concerning the longevity of governance structures, said, “each generation” should be granted the “solemn opportunity” to update government with “periodic repairs, from generation to generation, until the end of time.” For much of US history, this has meant creating voter protections, improving access to polls, and keeping an eye on gerrymandering. However, generations of political passivity has caused democracy in the United States to stagnate.

Currently, countries around the world, in all stages of development, are experimenting with ways to update their democratic institutions to provide deliberative structures that actualize their citizens’ contributions by taking advantage of cutting-edge information and communications technology (“ICT”). Updating governance structures to meet modern challenges is accomplished by re-imagining citizens’ relationship with their government from one based on dominance and subservience to one that enshrines impartiality, accountability, transparency, and deliberation–the four basic functions of democracy. This paper lays out the theoretical and philosophical argument for updating US democracy to take advantage of ICT and lays out practical steps that can be taken, with limitations and power dynamics in mind.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97114&title=%E2%80%9CVoter%20Discrimination%20and%20Deliberative%20Democracy%20in%20the%20Technological%20Era%E2%80%9D>
Posted in theory<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=41>


“Campaign Donor Pleaded Guilty to Trying to Bribe Mayor de Blasio”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97112>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:04 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97112> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/nyregion/de-blasio-mayor-nyc-bribe-singh.html?hpw&rref=nyregion&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region%C2%AEion=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&referer=https://www.nytimes.com/>

A campaign donor to Mayor Bill de Blasio secretly pleaded guilty in federal court to bribery, admitting that he used his contributions to the mayor to try to win favorable lease terms for a restaurant he owned on city property, newly unsealed court records show.

While the court papers included no charges against Mr. de Blasio or other city officials, a federal criminal information in the case makes it clear that the donor, Harendra Singh, got something in return.

The court documents said that the mayor took steps to benefit Mr. Singh in exchange for the contributions, and that an unnamed senior aide to Mr. de Blasio arranged a meeting to pressure a city agency to offer more favorable terms to Mr. Singh.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97112&title=%E2%80%9CCampaign%20Donor%20Pleaded%20Guilty%20to%20Trying%20to%20Bribe%20Mayor%20de%20Blasio%E2%80%9D>
Posted in bribery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>, campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“Public Hearings and Congressional Redistricting: Evidence from the Western United States 2011–2012”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97110>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:03 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97110> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Peter Miller and Bernie Grofman have written this article<http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/elj.2016.0425> for ELJ. Here is the abstract:

We test theories about the effects of public input into redistricting, with evidence taken from remarks made in person at public hearings. One model, the cynical model, features legislators acting in their own interest and carries an expectation that public input is more or less a sham that line drawers will ignore, holding hearings only to give the appearance of responsiveness. A variant of this cynical model suggests that political parties and candidates will seek to manipulate the public input process by making partisan suggestions disguised as citizen input. An idealist vision, on the other hand, suggests input by the public can provide important information to line drawers about citizen preferences which can and will get integrated into plans. A further complication is who is drawing the lines. We might expect that redistricting commissions would be more responsive to public input than that of legislators, since the former has less of a partisan motivation. We analyze a sample of 937 suggestions proffered in person by individuals, public officials, and group representatives at 22 public comment hearings in nine states. We find the public does contribute a large number of “feasibly mappable” suggestions that are incorporated into plans, but only suggestions addressing a small geographical area are likely to be adopted. Finally, we find little difference in the degree to which different types of redistricting authorities incorporate suggestions made at hearings into their plans.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97110&title=%E2%80%9CPublic%20Hearings%20and%20Congressional%20Redistricting%3A%20Evidence%20from%20the%20Western%20United%20States%202011%E2%80%932012%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“How the GOP Rigs Elections; With a combination of gerrymandering, voter-ID laws and dark money, Republicans have tipped the political scales in their favor. Will it be enough to keep Democrats from claiming victory in 2018?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97108>
Posted on January 25, 2018 7:00 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97108> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ari Berman<https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gop-rigs-elections-gerrymandering-voter-id-laws-dark-money-w515664> for Rolling Stone.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97108&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20the%20GOP%20Rigs%20Elections%3B%20With%20a%20combination%20of%20gerrymandering%2C%20voter-ID%20laws%20and%20dark%20money%2C%20Republicans%20have%20tipped%20the%20political%20scales%20in%20their%20favor.%20Will%20it%20be%20enough%20to%20keep%20Democrats%20from%20claiming%20victory%20in%202018%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Proponents’ Standing to Defend Their Ballot Initiatives: A Post-Hollingsworth Work-Arounds?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97106>
Posted on January 24, 2018 2:45 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97106> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

John Caragozian and Nat Stern have posted this article<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2852466> on SSRN (Northeastern University Law Review). Here is the abstract:

Voter-enacted ballot initiatives have proved an effective means by which citizens can change state law in the absence of legislative willingness to enact the desired policy. Like other laws, however, successful initiatives are susceptible to legal challenges in the courts. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court held that ballot initiative proponents lack standing to defend their initiatives. Fearing that their initiatives might be undefended (if state officials refuse to defend), proponents and scholars are now proposing to embed language in initiatives to give proponents personal standing to defend their initiatives. For example, one pending initiative would assess a $10,000 penalty on the proponent if the initiative is invalidated, thereby giving him a personal stake in the initiative’s validity. The Article concludes that Hollingsworth’s obstacles to standing, along with the Court’s broader restrictive standing philosophy, cast substantial doubt on these new proposals.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97106&title=%E2%80%9CProponents%E2%80%99%20Standing%20to%20Defend%20Their%20Ballot%20Initiatives%3A%20A%20Post-Hollingsworth%20Work-Arounds%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in direct democracy<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=62>


North Carolina Seeks SCOTUS Stay to Stop Use of New Districts Ordered to Solve Racial Gerrymandering; Reasons for Doubt<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97104>
Posted on January 24, 2018 1:07 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97104> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here’s the pleading<http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/17A790-North-Carolina-v.-Covington-Stay-App_-2.pdf> (via Amy Howe<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/north-carolina-redistricting-wars-return/>).

As I recently explained<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97015>,

There are two reasons to give such a stay order lower chances in this case. First, this is a case on remand from SCOTUS, where there have already been findings of a racial gerrymander. In contrast, at this point there is uncertainly whether courts will even have the power to rein in partisan gerrymanders. This is on the table in cases before the Supreme Court this term. Second, in this case there are already redrawn districts approved by the district court. There would not be a further delay in implementing an order. In the other case, there were no new districts drawn yet, and the process would have dragged out further.

Thus, although I think the Court has been very willing (too willing in my view<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/06/28/the-supreme-court-is-in-no-hurry-to-protect-voters-from-gerrymandering/?utm_term=.1c6b6216e091>) to make voters wait for remedies in redistricting cases, I think a request for a stay of the racial gerrymandering remedial order has a lower chance of success here.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97104&title=North%20Carolina%20Seeks%20SCOTUS%20Stay%20to%20Stop%20Use%20of%20New%20Districts%20Ordered%20to%20Solve%20Racial%20Gerrymandering%3B%20Reasons%20for%20Doubt>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


Want to Be Special Counsel to Village of Port Chester, NY, As It Redesigns Its Election System?<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97102>
Posted on January 24, 2018 1:04 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97102> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Via email a note about a new RFP for a special counsel:
Special counsel will assist the Village Board of Trustees consider governance/voting method options for the election of trustees at upcoming Village Elections.
Port Chester had entered into a consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice and an Intervenor which authorized an electoral system of cumulative voting for 2010, 2013 and 2016. The consent decree expired in June 2016 with the next Village Election in March 2019 at which time the terms of all six trustees and the mayor expire.  The Village is presented the unique opportunity to select a governance.voting method option that would  be appropriate for the Village and comply with New York State Elections Law and the Voting Rights Act.
Details below the fold.

Continue reading →<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97102#more-97102>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97102&title=Want%20to%20Be%20Special%20Counsel%20to%20Village%20of%20Port%20Chester%2C%20NY%2C%20As%20It%20Redesigns%20Its%20Election%20System%3F>


Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
SCOTUSBlog Symposium on Minnesota Political Apparel at the Polls Case, Mansky<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97099>
Posted on January 24, 2018 12:55 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97099> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Symposium before the oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky<http://www.scotusblog.com/category/special-features/special-feature-symposium-before-the-oral-argument-in-minnesota-voters-alliance-v-mansky/>

Special Feature: Special Feature: Symposium before the oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky
Date

Author

Post Title


01.24.18

Daniel I. Weiner and Christopher R. Deluzio<http://www.scotusblog.com/author/daniel-weiner/>

Symposium: Whose side is the First Amendment really on?<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/symposium-whose-side-first-amendment-really/>

01.24.18

Elizabeth Slattery<http://www.scotusblog.com/author/elizabeth-slattery/>

Symposium: Don’t tread on my passive political speech<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/symposium-dont-tread-passive-political-speech/>

01.23.18

J. Gerald Hebert<http://www.scotusblog.com/author/gerald-hebert/>

Symposium: The right to vote in peace<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/symposium-right-vote-peace/>

01.23.18

Rodney Smolla<http://www.scotusblog.com/author/rodney-smolla/>

Symposium: Nothing undignified about political messaging — in America, we call that democracy<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/symposium-nothing-undignified-political-messaging-america-call-democracy/>

01.22.18

Amy Howe<http://www.scotusblog.com/author/amy-howe/>

Justices to hear challenge to Minnesota voting dress code: In Plain English<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/01/justices-hear-challenge-minnesota-voting-dress-code-plain-english/>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97099&title=SCOTUSBlog%20Symposium%20on%20Minnesota%20Political%20Apparel%20at%20the%20Polls%20Case%2C%20Mansky>
Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Trump Allies Are Profiting From Multiple Trump Groups, Testing Campaign Finance Laws”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97097>
Posted on January 24, 2018 12:53 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97097> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

BuzzFeed:<https://www.buzzfeed.com/tariniparti/trump-allies-are-profiting-from-multiple-trump-groups?utm_term=.pev80jVMm3#.lc6WRJ91gd>

President Donald Trump’s close political advisers are making millions of dollars working for several different entities gearing up for Trump’s re-election campaign — raising questions about whether they are following campaign finance laws designed to keep campaigns from coordinating with big-money outside groups.

Campaigns and party committees are not allowed to coordinate with allied outside groups that are supposed to be independent, such as super PACs and nonprofits. But the Federal Election Commission, which is governed by a board of three Republicans and three Democrats and usually deadlocks on issues, has hardly enforced that rule. In the 2016 election, candidates and their allied groups took advantage of those blurred lines to raise and spend millions of dollars.

Now, that pattern is continuing, based on new fundraising reports filed Wednesday with the FEC.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97097&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%20Allies%20Are%20Profiting%20From%20Multiple%20Trump%20Groups%2C%20Testing%20Campaign%20Finance%20Laws%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


New Campaign Finance Questions in Canada About Independent Expenditures and Levelling the Playing Field<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97095>
Posted on January 24, 2018 12:40 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97095> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Star reports.<https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/01/23/government-stands-by-its-campaign-finance-law.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97095&title=New%20Campaign%20Finance%20Questions%20in%20Canada%20About%20Independent%20Expenditures%20and%20Levelling%20the%20Playing%20Field>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, comparative election law<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=107>


“Welcome to Florida, Voters (Votantes, Bienvenidos a Florida); Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria can swing the next election. Here’s how.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97093>
Posted on January 24, 2018 12:38 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97093> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy writes.<http://www.shondaland.com/act/a15860747/florida-register-vote-election-puerto-rico/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97093&title=%E2%80%9CWelcome%20to%20Florida%2C%20Voters%20(Votantes%2C%20Bienvenidos%20a%20Florida)%3B%20Puerto%20Ricans%20affected%20by%20Hurricane%20Maria%20can%20swing%20the%20next%20election.%20Here%E2%80%99s%20how.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Banana Republic Dept: Wisconsin Senate Republicans Aim to Remove Civil Servants Next at Government Ethics and Election Commissions<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97089>
Posted on January 24, 2018 9:09 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97089> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Patrick Marley:<https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/23/wisconsin-republicans-hope-oust-leaders-ethics-elections-commissions-tuesday/1054414001/>

Republican state senators Tuesday denied the confirmations of the directors of Wisconsin’s ethics and elections commissions — and the leader of the state Senate said he hoped to remove two civil servants at those agencies next.

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) said Republicans had lost faith in the Ethics Commission and Elections Commission because they continue to employ people who worked for the now-disbanded Government Accountability Board. The accountability board participated in a sweeping investigation of Republicans that was shut down in 2015<http://archive.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/wisconsin-supreme-court-wont-reopen-john-doe-probe-rules-against-special-prosecutor-b99626790z1-359988701.html/> after the state Supreme Court concluded nothing illegal occurred.

“I wish they’d all resign,” Fitzgerald told reporters of former accountability board employees.

UPDATE:

It gets worse.<https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/956258985186906113>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97089&title=Banana%20Republic%20Dept%3A%20Wisconsin%20Senate%20Republicans%20Aim%20to%20Remove%20Civil%20Servants%20Next%20at%20Government%20Ethics%20and%20Election%20Commissions>
Posted in election administration<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


Maryland Partisan Gerrymandering Case, Benisek v. Lamone, Set for March 28 Oral Argument at SCOTUS<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97087>
Posted on January 24, 2018 8:38 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97087> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

So reports<https://twitter.com/shermancourt/status/956202219866677248> Mark Sherman.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97087&title=Maryland%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Case%2C%20Benisek%20v.%20Lamone%2C%20Set%20for%20March%2028%20Oral%20Argument%20at%20SCOTUS>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, 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/20180125/442c5909/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/20180125/442c5909/attachment.png>