[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/26/18

[Smith, Brad]

Why does that not accurately state the law? Because of the “Inslee exception?”

Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
  Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 E. Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43214
(617) 236-6317

From: Adam Bonin <adam at boninlaw.com>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 11:40 AM
To: Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
Cc: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/26/18

I think the Greitens one was over the line -- it literally ended with a tagline of "VOTE NOVEMBER 8th TRUMP PENCE," but that's not to say it's in any way difficult to meet the Gregg standard of ensuring that any reference to Trump is focused on his horrible, destructive policies and not whether one should vote for/against him, especially in an off-year election.

As far as which language is Mr. Wang's and which is the headline writer's, I think you'd agree these two passages within the article do not accurately state the law:

As the midterm congressional elections unfold, candidates are also running in 36 states for governor and competing for more than 6,000 state legislative seats. How many of these state candidates do you think will say something good or bad about President Trump? Probably more than you can count. When they do, they will break an obscure federal law.

So now state candidates find themselves in a tough spot. If they want to attack or praise Trump, who has declared he is a candidate in 2020, they will be violating federal campaign finance laws. While state candidates must keep their mouths shut, independent groups may support or oppose federal candidates as much as they want.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180326/ccbdf383/attachment.html>