[EL] Deceptive Practices legislation

[Adam Bonin]

The new bill seems to be similar to what then-Sen. Obama introduced in 2005
and 2007, plus the new stuff on "false endorsements."  See
https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/1975/text for the
first iteration.

Adam C. Bonin
The Law Office of Adam C. Bonin
121 S. Broad Street, Suite 400
Philadelphia, PA  19107

(267) 242-5014 (c)
(215) 701-2321 (f)
adam at boninlaw.com
http://www.boninlaw.com

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
>
> “Democrats Propose Making It Illegal To Spread False Election
> Information”; Some Thoughts on Constitutionality
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=100305>
>
> Posted on July 26, 2018 10:20 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=100305>
> by *Rick Hasen* <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> HuffPost:
> <https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/false-voting-information-legislation_us_5b59dbf1e4b0de86f49468c3?c3h>
>
> *Several congressional Democrats plan to introduce legislation
> <https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4618841/Deceptive-Practices-07-25-2018.pdf> Thursday
> that would make it a federal crime to knowingly and intentionally publish
> false information about elections.*
>
> *The legislation would criminalize knowingly spreading wrong information
> related to the time and place of elections as well as voter qualifications
> and registration status. The bill would also make it illegal to knowingly
> claim an endorsement from someone within 60 days of a federal election.
> Anyone who spread such misinformation would be subject to up to five years
> in prison and a $100,000 fine.*
>
> In my law review article, A Constitutional Right to Lie in Campaigns and
> Elections? <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151618>,
> I draw a distinction between laws barring false speech in campaigns (which
> is likely a First Amendment violation) and those that bar false speech
> about there where/when/how of voting (which is likely constitutional).
>
> Since I wrote that Article, the Supreme Court appeared to agree on the
> constitutionality of such laws. As I explained at Slate
> <https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1435_2co3.pdf>, in Minnesota
> Voters Alliance v. Mansky
> <https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1435_2co3.pdf>, “the
> court made it clear that a state ‘may prohibit messages intended to mislead
> voters about voting requirements and procedures.’ So Minnesota likely had
> the power to ban the ‘Please I.D. Me’ buttons, not because they are
> political, but because they are misleading. In an era of campaign dirty
> tricks, “fake news,” and misinformation, this is a welcome recognition that
> states have broad powers to stop false and misleading speech
> <https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr/vol74/iss1/4/> about when and how to
> vote.”
>
> This suggests that the part of the proposed law that would bar spreading
> wrong information about the time and place of elections as well as voter
> qualification and registration status would be constitutional, but the law
> barring false statements about campaign endorsements may well not be.
>
> [image: Share]
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D100305&title=%E2%80%9CDemocrats%20Propose%20Making%20It%20Illegal%20To%20Spread%20False%20Election%20Information%E2%80%9D%3B%20Some%20Thoughts%20on%20Constitutionality>
>
> Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180727/02bf333b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180727/02bf333b/attachment.png>