[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/20/18

Tue Mar 20 07:30:17 PDT 2018

Out Today: My New Book on Justice Scalia’s Legacy; Later Today: Adam Winkler and I Discuss (Livestream Available) the Supreme Court’s Past, Present, and Future<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98229>
Posted on March 20, 2018 7:27 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98229> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

My new book, The Justice of Contradictions: Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Justice-2DContradictions-2DAntonin-2DPolitics-2DDisruption_dp_0300228643_ref-3Dsr-5F1-5F1-3Fie-3DUTF8-26qid-3D1516904231-26sr-3D8-2D1-26keywords-3Drichard-2Bl.-2Bhasen&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=ddhuTAflaknTv2V88E_pbr92LAZ6JRirepUGksOXRgc&m=ynmGNxtu6RGeC_DXH6uk8F31_7Td3xVTo2XJr-NQHvM&s=C4DzNe8ZJajum-BrVC0OWNo-gDzO9ZOsmz0-Bo_1X4M&e=> is out today from Yale University Press.<https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300228649/justice-contradictions> You can order the book at Amazon here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Justice-2DContradictions-2DAntonin-2DPolitics-2DDisruption_dp_0300228643_ref-3Dsr-5F1-5F1-3Fie-3DUTF8-26qid-3D1516904231-26sr-3D8-2D1-26keywords-3Drichard-2Bl.-2Bhasen&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=ddhuTAflaknTv2V88E_pbr92LAZ6JRirepUGksOXRgc&m=ynmGNxtu6RGeC_DXH6uk8F31_7Td3xVTo2XJr-NQHvM&s=C4DzNe8ZJajum-BrVC0OWNo-gDzO9ZOsmz0-Bo_1X4M&e=> ( Kindle version<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Justice-2DContradictions-2DAntonin-2DPolitics-2DDisruption-2Debook_dp_B07B51C83D_ref-3Dtmm-5Fkin-5Fswatch-5F0-3F-5Fencoding-3DUTF8-26qid-3D1516904231-26sr-3D8-2D1&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=ddhuTAflaknTv2V88E_pbr92LAZ6JRirepUGksOXRgc&m=ynmGNxtu6RGeC_DXH6uk8F31_7Td3xVTo2XJr-NQHvM&s=jB2M_c7PW64ZZISin86ESjaFp5UlCTwOkRO8nll6W6c&e=>, Audiobook from Audible<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Justice-2DContradictions-2DAntonin-2DPolitics-2DDisruption_dp_B0797LZWZH_ref-3Dtmm-5Faud-5Fswatch-5F0-3F-5Fencoding-3DUTF8-26qid-3D1516904231-26sr-3D8-2D1&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=ddhuTAflaknTv2V88E_pbr92LAZ6JRirepUGksOXRgc&m=ynmGNxtu6RGeC_DXH6uk8F31_7Td3xVTo2XJr-NQHvM&s=Iuj9NIir-OMzYoljdE-YyaLOVnqA8JLu4_RJIQ3DeQg&e=>).

Tonight I’ll be doing an event<http://www.law.uci.edu/events/2017-18/s2018/Hasen-Winkler-Book-Talk.html> at UC Irvine to be livestreamed<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98133> with Adam Winkler talking about my book and his excellent new book, We the Corporations.   This weekend C-SPAN Book TV will feature a panel about my book with Adam Liptak and Prof. Sue Bloch of Georgetown, and here’s a video of a recent NYU Brennan Center<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98133> talk with CNN’s Joan Biskupic.

Here are three pieces I’ve written related to the book, with more on the way:

Antonin Scalia’s disruption of the Supreme Court’s ways is here to stay<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/02/13/antonin-scalias-disruption-of-the-supreme-courts-ways-is-here-to-stay/?nid&utm_term=.562a62dc7b30>, Washington Post, Feb. 13, 2017

Stop treating Ruth Bader Ginsburg — a.k.a. ‘Notorious R.B.G.’ — like a celebrity<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-ruth-bader-ginsburg-celebrity-justices-supreme-court-20180215-story.html>, L.A. Times, Feb. 15, 2017

In Pair of of Opinions, Fight Over Textualism Lives On<https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/02/22/in-pair-of-opinions-justices-take-up-anti-textualism-cause/>, National Law Journal, Feb. 22, 2018

Free Speech vs. Freedom from Intimidation<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/the-supreme-court-is-reconsidering-campaigning-at-the-ballot-box-in-minnesota-voters-alliance-v-mansky.html>, Slate, Feb. 28, 2017

There’s one early review, from Kirkus Reviews<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.kirkusreviews.com_book-2Dreviews_richard-2Dl-2Dhasen_the-2Djustice-2Dof-2Dcontradictions_&d=DwMGaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=ddhuTAflaknTv2V88E_pbr92LAZ6JRirepUGksOXRgc&m=ynmGNxtu6RGeC_DXH6uk8F31_7Td3xVTo2XJr-NQHvM&s=YuOQclAIDObC7kVO4dP89aMMMRQyLIqpfd40b90B5r8&e=>, which writes that “Hasen effectively supports his critique with incisive analysis of pertinent cases and legal commentary, clearly explaining the fundamental theoretical and practical weaknesses of” Scalia’s approach.

Here are some book blurbs:

“Like a Scalia opinion, The Justice of Contradictions is superbly written, filled with brilliant insights and unsparing in its analysis. Both liberals and conservatives will see Scalia and his legacy in a new and more illuminating light.”—Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America

“Rick Hasen uses his powerful analytic ability to point out the numerous contradictions and inconsistencies in Scalia’s jurisprudence. Any serious student of the Supreme Court will find much to admire, and something to disagree with, in this important book.”—Burt Neuborne, author of Madison’s Music: On Reading the First Amendment

“A brilliant analysis of Justice Antonin Scalia’s work.   This clearly written and accessible book will be an essential resource for all thinking about Scalia’s place in history and the last three decades of American law.”—Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law

“An accessible and insightful account of Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court’s most colorful, controversial, and iconoclastic justices.  Hasen delivers a nuanced appreciation of a brilliant man whose many internal contradictions undermined his own potential for influence on the Court—even as he profoundly shaped the way we think and argue about constitutional law today.”—David Cole, National Legal Director, ACLU, and author of Engines of Liberty: How Citizen Movements Succeed

“Antonin Scalia was one of the most consequential and controversial justices in the history of the Supreme Court. Rick Hasen has given us a masterpiece on his jurisprudence and his personality—sophisticated but accessible, insightful and penetrating. A must-read for anyone interested in the Court and its impact on society.”—Norman Ornstein, resident scholar, American Enterprise Institute
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98229&title=Out%20Today%3A%20My%20New%20Book%20on%20Justice%20Scalia%E2%80%99s%20Legacy%3B%20Later%20Today%3A%20Adam%20Winkler%20and%20I%20Discuss%20(Livestream%20Available)%20the%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Past%2C%20Present%2C%20and%20Future>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

ACLU Wins Voting Rights Act Section 2 Suit in Sumter County, Georgia<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98227>
Posted on March 20, 2018 7:16 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98227> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:<https://www.acluga.org/en/press-releases/aclu-victory-federal-court-rules-sumter-countys-public-education-school-board>

A federal court in Albany agreed with the ACLU Voting Rights Project,  the Law Office of Bryan L. Sells, and the ACLU of Georgia, that the Sumter County Board of Elections and Registration’s current school board district lines are unfair to African-Americans, who are 54% of the county’s population.
On Saturday, the court ruled<https://www.acluga.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/aclu-sumter-county-court-order-on-preliminary-injunction-2018.pdf> that the current at-large method of voting for the county’s public education school board members disproportionately favored the white majority candidates over the black minority preferred candidates. Reverend Matt Wright, Jr., the plaintiff, brought the lawsuit against the county to change the at-large method of voting so that the African American community would have a fair chance to elect their candidate of choice to a seat on the public education school board.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98227&title=ACLU%20Wins%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20Section%202%20Suit%20in%20Sumter%20County%2C%20Georgia>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“FEC Unlikely To Launch NRA-Russia Probe”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98225>
Posted on March 20, 2018 7:13 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98225> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM:<https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/fec-no-real-investigation-nra-russia-yet>

News broke<https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/16/nra-russia-election-donations-fec-investigation-468661> late last week that the Federal Election Commission had opened a preliminary inquiry into whether Russians illegally channeled money to the National Rifle Association to support Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

But the FEC’s move, which came after a complaint from a Democratic group, amounts to little more than a standard response, experts say. It will likely be months before the matter moves up through the appropriate channels and the controversy-averse panel of commissioners votes on whether to launch a formal investigation. And they’re highly unlikely to vote to do so.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98225&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20Unlikely%20To%20Launch%20NRA-Russia%20Probe%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>

“Kansas voting trial over. One more court day, a contempt hearing, ahead for Kobach”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98223>
Posted on March 19, 2018 9:16 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98223> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bryan Lowry<http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article205942439.html> for the KC Star:

A federal judge will decide whether thousands can vote in Kansas this fall after the conclusion of a two-week trial that saw a leading candidate for governor scolded<http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article204224234.html> and scrutinized.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a Republican candidate for governor, led the legal team<http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article198143494.html> defending the state’s proof of citizenship requirement, a policy he crafted, against a pair of federal lawsuits….

Kobach’s office has pointed to 129 non-citizens that it says either registered or attempted to register over nearly two decades, but he has repeatedly said this number could be “the tip of the iceberg” and has offered estimates that as many as 18,000 are on the state’s voter rolls.

Dale Ho, the lead attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in the case, poked holes in these claims during his closing arguments Monday.

He pointed out that Kobach’s evidence from Sedgwick County shows that only 18 non-citizens registered going back to 1999 and only five of them ever voted compared to millions of ballots cast in the county during that timeframe.

“The iceberg on close inspection, your honor, it’s more of an ice cube,” Ho told U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson. “There’s no evidence that it’s in the thousands as Secretary Kobach has asserted.”

Ho played for the second time during the course of the trial a Kansas City Star video in which Kobach asserted that millions <http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article204976839.html> of illegal votes cost Trump the popular vote in 2016 and pointed to testimony from Kobach’s own witnesses disputing that.

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98223&title=%E2%80%9CKansas%20voting%20trial%20over.%20One%20more%20court%20day%2C%20a%20contempt%20hearing%2C%20ahead%20for%20Kobach%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

Roundup of Stories on SCOTUS and Three-Judge Court PA Gerrymandering Decisions<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98221>
Posted on March 19, 2018 8:43 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98221> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Howard’s got it.<https://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/2018/03/19/#75382>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98221&title=Roundup%20of%20Stories%20on%20SCOTUS%20and%20Three-Judge%20Court%20PA%20Gerrymandering%20Decisions>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

Foley: Constitutional Preservation, the Marbury Duty & Congressional Gerrymanders<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98219>
Posted on March 19, 2018 8:17 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98219> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The following is the second in a series of guest posts on Benisek v. Lamone<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/benisek-v-lamone/?wpmp_switcher=desktop> by Ohio State’s Ned Foley<http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/professor/edward-b-foley/>.

Edward B. Foley

This blog essay is the second in a series derived from a contribution<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3128936> to a University of Georgia Law Review symposium and picks up where the first installment<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98187> left off.

Suppose the president of the United States, either this or a future one, decided to declare a state of national emergency and, using that declaration as a pretext, ordered the suspension of the next regularly scheduled presidential election and that, contrary to the express language of the Twentieth Amendment, the incumbent’s term of office would extend indefinitely until the declaration of national emergency were lifted.

That purported extension of the president’s term of office would be patently unconstitutional.  In addition to violating the unambiguous text of the Twentieth Amendment, it would contravene the Supreme Court’s repeated assertion that there is no “national emergency” power; nor any “national emergency” exception to the limitations that the Constitution imposes on the exercise of governmental authority.  Among the other major cases in which the Court has confirmed this point are the Minnesota Mortgage Case (Blaisdell) and the Steel Seizure Case (Youngstown).

Thus, were a president to attempt to extend his (or her) term of office in this unconstitutional way, the Supreme Court would be called upon to enjoin this unconstitutional usurpation.  Assuming compliance with the “case or controversy” requirements of the judicial power in Article III, including a plaintiff with proper standing (perhaps a candidate seeking to challenge the incumbent in the next regularly scheduled presidential election), the Court could not shirk its responsibility to invalidate the unconstitutional extension of the incumbent’s term on the ground that the litigation was too politically sensitive.  There might be fear that the incumbent president would refuse to obey the judicial order nullifying the president’s unconstitutional decree, just as there was fear that President Nixon would refuse to obey the Court’s order requiring him to turn over the Watergate tapes.  But that fear would not justify the Court’s failure to issue its order.  Under the doctrine of Marbury v. Madison, in a properly presented lawsuit the Court must declare and enforce what the Constitution requires.  It follows that in a government that purports to operate according to the rule of law, the president would acquiesce in the Court’s pronouncement of the constitutional command.  Otherwise, there would be a genuine and full-fledged constitutional crisis.

What all this establishes is that the Court’s duty to enforce the terms and requirements of the Constitution under Marbury v. Madison operates to thwart those other parts of the government that would endeavor to subvert it or its provisions.  The judicial effort to save the Constitution from subversion may not be successful.  There can be no guarantee of that.  But what Marbury does promise is that if the Constitution does fail, it won’t be because the federal judiciary refused to intervene when its jurisdiction is invoked.

So much, so good—but what does it have to do with congressional gerrymandering, which is the issue at hand because of the Benisek<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/benisek-v-lamone/?wpmp_switcher=desktop> case from Maryland, now under consideration at the Court?  To see the connection, a couple more hypotheticals will help.

Continue reading →<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98219#more-98219>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98219&title=Foley%3A%20Constitutional%20Preservation%2C%20the%20Marbury%20Duty%20%26%20Congressional%20Gerrymanders>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“Why does it Matter if the NRA Used Russian Money to help Donald Trump’s Election?”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98217>
Posted on March 19, 2018 8:14 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98217> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy<https://www.natlawreview.com/article/why-does-it-matter-if-nra-used-russian-money-to-help-donald-trump-s-election> for the National Law Review.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98217&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20does%20it%20Matter%20if%20the%20NRA%20Used%20Russian%20Money%20to%20help%20Donald%20Trump%E2%80%99s%20Election%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

Ron Collins’ SCOTUSBlog Interview with Me: “Ask the author: Antonin Scalia – ‘The Justice of Contradictions'”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98215>
Posted on March 19, 2018 1:42 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98215> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ron Collins<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/03/ask-author-antonin-scalia-justice-contradictions/> at SCOTUSBlog:

The following is a series of questions posed by Ronald Collins to Richard L. Hasen<http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/> on the occasion of the publication of his book “The Justice of Contradictions: Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption<https://www.amazon.com/Justice-Contradictions-Antonin-Politics-Disruption/dp/0300228643/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1520711530&sr=1-1&keywords=The+Justice+of+Contradictions%3A+Antonin+Scalia+and+the+Politics+of+Disruption>” (Yale University Press, 2018, pp. 226).

Richard Hasen is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. Hasen is a nationally recognized expert in election law and campaign finance regulation, and is co-author of a leading casebook on election law.

Welcome, Rick, and thank you for taking the time to participate in this question-and-answer exchange for our readers. And congratulations on the publication of your latest book.

* * *

Question: You use the word “contradictions” in your title. What do you mean by that?

Hasen: Thanks to you and SCOTUSblog for this opportunity to talk about my new book, and for your great (but tough!) questions.

Justice Antonin Scalia was a jumble of contradictions. He said he had come up with jurisprudential theories to decide constitutional and statutory cases in ways that would increase the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, but his response to other justices who declined to follow his theories helped to delegitimize the court; he claimed these justices were acting as super-legislators and not judges. He said he wanted more civility in society and the law, but he used language in his opinions<http://www.businessinsider.com/this-scalia-zinger-is-funniest-footnote-to-come-out-of-the-supreme-court-this-term-2015-6> attacking other justices that was unprecedented in its nastiness. He was a Harvard law graduate who railed against Ivy League elites. There are many more examples of his contradictions in the book.

Question: In your subtitle you use the word “politics.” Why in a book about a judge and judging did you feel it necessary to use that word?…
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98215&title=Ron%20Collins%E2%80%99%20SCOTUSBlog%20Interview%20with%20Me%3A%20%E2%80%9CAsk%20the%20author%3A%20Antonin%20Scalia%20%E2%80%93%20%E2%80%98The%20Justice%20of%20Contradictions%27%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Scalia<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=123>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

Q & A with UCI on My New Book on Justice Scalia’s Legacy<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98213>
Posted on March 19, 2018 1:40 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98213> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Read it here.<https://news.uci.edu/2018/03/19/judicial-review/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98213&title=Q%20%26%20A%20with%20UCI%20on%20My%20New%20Book%20on%20Justice%20Scalia%E2%80%99s%20Legacy>
Posted in Scalia<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=123>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

“FEC probes whether NRA got illegal Russian donations”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98211>
Posted on March 19, 2018 1:38 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98211> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico<https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/16/nra-russia-election-donations-fec-investigation-468661>:<https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/16/nra-russia-election-donations-fec-investigation-468661>

he Federal Election Commission has launched a preliminary investigation into whether Russian entities gave illegal contributions to the National Rifle Association that were intended to benefit the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election, according to people who were notified of the probe.

The inquiry stems in part from a complaint from a liberal advocacy group, the American Democracy Legal Fund, which asked the FEC to look into media reports about links between the rifle association and Russian entities, including a banker with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98211&title=%E2%80%9CFEC%20probes%20whether%20NRA%20got%20illegal%20Russian%20donations%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

Breaking: Supreme Court, With No Noted Dissent, Refuses to Intervene in Pa Redistricting Case Just Hours After Lower Court Rules<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98206>
Posted on March 19, 2018 12:20 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98206> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
20h<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975786800601018368>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/973280416546414592/1OewXBi4_normal.jpg]Chris Geidner<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner>
✔@chrisgeidner<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner>

Three-judge district court ruling against challenge to PA Supreme Court redistricting decision here: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.115390/gov.uscourts.pamd.115390.136.0_1.pdf …<https://t.co/Wh7DfIKADw> https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776 …<https://t.co/9JXd1Yxlz2>
<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975814031729745921>

[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/973280416546414592/1OewXBi4_normal.jpg]Chris Geidner<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner>
✔@chrisgeidner<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner>

BREAKING: #SCOTUS<https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash> will not stop PA’s new congressional districts from going into effect, denying Pa Republicans’ request for a stay of the PA Supreme Court decision. There were no noted dissents. pic.twitter.com/m1MFx8r7QB<https://t.co/m1MFx8r7QB>
12:19 PM - Mar 19, 2018<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975814031729745921>
[View image on Twitter]<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975814031729745921/photo/1>
·         <https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=975814031729745921>
1,172<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=975814031729745921>
·         <https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975814031729745921>
538 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/975814031729745921>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>

I called this case a long shot for a long time, but the fact that there was no noted dissents is puzzling given the long delay.  The claim was really a weak one and would have led to a huge number of lawsuits challenging state court cases striking down redistricting on state constitutional grounds. Here are some possibilities for the delay.

1, The Court was waiting for the lower court to rule, in case the lower court saw something worth pursing. Given that the interests were almost identical to this case, this does not make much sense, but for the timing.

2. A Justice decided to write, another Justice wrote a response, and the original Justice changed his or her mind.  Who knows?

3. A Justice or more needed more time to consider the issues, and was pondering a dissent but then decided not to write.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98206&title=Breaking%3A%20Supreme%20Court%2C%20With%20No%20Noted%20Dissent%2C%20Refuses%20to%20Intervene%20in%20Pa%20Redistricting%20Case%20Just%20Hours%20After%20Lower%20Court%20Rules>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Breaking: Three-Judge Federal Court (All Republican Nominees) Rejects PA Congressional Redistricting Challenge, Leaving Issue to SCOTUS<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98200>
Posted on March 19, 2018 10:11 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98200> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
View image on Twitter<https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776/photo/1>
[View image on Twitter]<https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776/photo/1>
<https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776>

[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/525038539797307392/Uy_rPcnx_normal.jpeg]Greg Stohr<https://twitter.com/GregStohr>
✔@GregStohr<https://twitter.com/GregStohr>

BREAKING: Three-judge panel rejects Republican bid to block new Pennsylvania congressional voting map. Only thing left is stay application at #Scotus<https://twitter.com/hashtag/Scotus?src=hash>.
10:09 AM - Mar 19, 2018<https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776>
·         <https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=975781230888267776>
365<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=975781230888267776>
·         <https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776>
236 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/975781230888267776>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>

UPDATE: You can find the lower court opinion here<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/corman-three-judge-court.pdf>. I find it hard to believe that any appeal of this order to the Supreme Court would make a difference when the issue is already before the Court in the pending Turzai case.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98200&title=Breaking%3A%20Three-Judge%20Federal%20Court%20(All%20Republican%20Nominees)%20Rejects%20PA%20Congressional%20Redistricting%20Challenge%2C%20Leaving%20Issue%20to%20SCOTUS>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“California’s free-for-all primary election rules could surprise everyone in 2018 … again”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98198>
Posted on March 19, 2018 8:20 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98198> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

John Myers for the LAT:<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-top-two-primary-changes-analysis-20180319-story.html>

The California primary that’s now less than three months away promises to be the system’s most important test, and possibly its most controversial. Although Democrats have largely consolidated their power behind just a few formidable candidates in statewide contests, local races with a multitude of candidates could allow Republicans to quell the anti-Trump fervor in at least four congressional districts<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-democrats-narrowing-house-fields-20180224-story.html> that Democrats otherwise are well poised to capture.

“The top-two primary math is showing us there need to be fewer Democrats in those races,” said Merrill, whose Fight Back California political action committee is betting the bank on the seven Republican districts won by Democrat Hillary Clinton<http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-dccc-sets-sights-on-seven-california-1485806622-htmlstory.html> in 2016.

Recent polling by Merrill’s PAC found significant potential for GOP candidates in Southern California’s hottest races to finish first and second — even though a plurality of those surveyed said they would “definitely” vote Democratic. That includes seats being vacated by Reps. Darrell Issa<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-issa-retire-20180110-story.html> (R-Vista) and Ed Royce<http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-california-rep-ed-royce-announces-he-ll-1515449555-htmlstory.html> (R-Fullerton) and the reelection effort of embattled Rep. Dana Rohrabacher<http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-trump-rohrabacher-20170315-story.html> (R-Costa Mesa).

Analysts also have pointed out the possibility for dispersed Democratic support in large fields of candidates running in GOP congressional districts representing the Central Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills. The nonpartisan California Target Book now counts 60 Democrats running in the 14 districts currently represented by Republicans.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D98198&title=%E2%80%9CCalifornia%E2%80%99s%20free-for-all%20primary%20election%20rules%20could%20surprise%20everyone%20in%202018%20%E2%80%A6%20again%E2%80%9D>
Posted in political parties<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>, primaries<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>

--
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/20180320/94a28b97/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/20180320/94a28b97/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1883 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180320/94a28b97/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14420 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180320/94a28b97/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35027 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180320/94a28b97/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1807 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180320/94a28b97/attachment-0003.jpg>