[EL] ELB News and Commentary 11/14/18

[Rick Hasen]

After Lessons of Bush v Gore, Do Bill Nelson’s Lawsuits Go Too Far in Trying to Change Florida Election Law?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102236>
Posted on November 13, 2018 9:18 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102236> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I get it. Rick Scott is ahead in the Florida Senate race and so he wants the counting to end while he is ahead. He’s not only sued to try to get the counting done; he’s raised bogus claims<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/florida-election-chaos-2020-trump-nightmare-scenario.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_ru> of election fraud and stolen elections. I’m not a fan of either his litigation or PR strategy.

And I get Bill Nelson’s strategy too. He’s behind in the Florida Senate race and wants to have every vote counted. Makes total sense to push for a full recount, and get to the bottom of the undervote problem in Broward County (my money is on poor ballot design rather than machine counting error, but we’ll see.)

But now Nelson’s filed three lawsuits in addition to one already filed, and I’m less comfortable.<https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2018/11/13/bill-nelson-and-democrats-file-three-new-election-lawsuits/>

Among other things, Nelson is arguing for a chance for voters to cure absentee ballots tossed because of a signature mismatch; to extended the tight deadlines for the recounting and certification of votes; and to require election officials doing any manual recount to take into account a broader sense of the voters’ intent in marking the ballot than are allowed under current state law

I’m sympathetic to the arguments in general, given my belief<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1344476> that election statutes, when possible should be interpreted to enfranchise voters. But Florida laws were rewritten after the 2000 Bush v. Gore debacle to deal with giving too much discretion to election officials to decide on what counts as a valid vote, and rules that are clear in advance are the best for fair election administration. And the complaints about the rules for dealing with signature mismatches or deadlines are not new. Perhaps it is too late to start bringing these challenges now, when the very outcome of the election hinges on what the courts do. (I’ve been arguing<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=698201> for this aggressive application of laches in election cases for some time, in those cases where the problems were evident before the election but lawyers did not sue before the election to get a cure.)

I understand the mantra of counting every vote, and I like rules that enfranchise voters. But one lesson of Bush v Gore is that there are countervailing concerns, such as having clear rules in advance and avoiding having courts decide the outcome of elections.

I’m still open to some persuasion, but I thing Nelson’s suits may go too far.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102236&title=After%20Lessons%20of%20Bush%20v%20Gore%2C%20Do%20Bill%20Nelson%E2%80%99s%20Lawsuits%20Go%20Too%20Far%20in%20Trying%20to%20Change%20Florida%20Election%20Law%3F>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Palm Beach County’s voting machines overheat and force recount of more than 170,000 votes”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102234>
Posted on November 13, 2018 9:04 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102234> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Miami Herald:<https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article221631215.html>

Palm Beach County’s race to recount votes is heating up — literally.

The county’s decade-old ballot-counting machines overheated and gave incorrect totals, forcing the county to restart its recount of about 175,000 early votes., supervisor of Elections Susan Bucher said Tuesday night.

The department has flown in mechanics to repair the machines.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102234&title=%E2%80%9CPalm%20Beach%20County%E2%80%99s%20voting%20machines%20overheat%20and%20force%20recount%20of%20more%20than%20170%2C000%20votes%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Meet the Native American Woman Who Beat the Sponsor of North Dakota’s ID Law”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102232>
Posted on November 13, 2018 9:02 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102232> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/us/politics/north-dakota-ruth-buffalo.html>

In the end, the Native American tribes of North Dakota could not save their preferred candidate, Senator Heidi Heitkamp, from a double-digit loss<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/us/politics/heidi-heitkamp-kevin-cramer-north-dakota.html?module=inline>.

But, galvanized by anger over the state’s voter ID law and aided by the intensive efforts of tribal leaders and advocacy groups<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/politics/north-dakota-voter-id.html?module=inline>, they turned out for last week’s election in numbers unprecedented even for a presidential election, much less a midterm.

In Sioux County, where the Standing Rock Indian Reservation is, turnout was up 105 percent from the last midterm elections in 2014 and 17 percent from the 2016 presidential election, according to data from the North Dakota secretary of state’s office. In Rolette County, home to the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, it was up 62 percent from 2014 and 33 percent from 2016. In Benson County, home to the Spirit Lake Nation, it was up 52 percent from 2014 and 10 percent from 2016.

One of the most striking results of the night, though, came far from the reservations: in a normally Republican district in the Fargo area, where Ruth Buffalo became the first Native American Democratic woman elected to the North Dakota Legislature. She did it by unseating State Representative Randy Boehning, the primary sponsor of the very voter ID law Native Americans had feared would disenfranchise them.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102232&title=%E2%80%9CMeet%20the%20Native%20American%20Woman%20Who%20Beat%20the%20Sponsor%20of%20North%20Dakota%E2%80%99s%20ID%20Law%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Key contests in Florida and Georgia remain mired in uncertainty amid expanding legal fights over ballot counts”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102230>
Posted on November 13, 2018 8:58 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102230> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/key-contests-in-florida-and-georgia-remain-mired-in-uncertainty-amid-expanding-legal-fights-over-ballot-counts/2018/11/13/b863cc66-e752-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html?utm_term=.c15c8adae59b>:

One week after Election Day, high-stakes contests in Florida and Georgia remained mired in uncertainty amid expanding legal fights and political wrangling that could further prolong the counting of ballots.

In Florida<https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/florida/?tid=a_inl_auto>, where elections officials are conducting machine recounts in the races for Senate, governor and agriculture commissioner, Sen. Bill Nelson (D) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee filed a suit in federal court Tuesday evening seeking to extend the deadline to finish the count in all 67 counties.Separately, Nelson and the state party went to court to try to loosen the rules for a manual recount as both parties braced for the ultra-close Senate race to come down to a hand inspection of ballots.

On Capitol Hill, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Florida elections officials to take as much time as they need to tally votes, even if they blow past a key deadline. He also demanded that Gov. Rick Scott (R), who is narrowly ahead of Nelson in the Senate race, recuse himself from the recount. Scott’s campaign swiftly rejected that notion, which is the subject of a suit expected to be heard in federal court this week.

In Georgia<https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/georgia/?tid=a_inl_auto>, a federal judge late Monday barred the secretary of state’s office from immediately certifying the state election results there to give voters a chance to address questions about their provisional ballots — a move that further prolongs the hard-fought Georgia governor’s race between Democrat Stacey Abrams and Republican Brian Kemp.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102230&title=%E2%80%9CKey%20contests%20in%20Florida%20and%20Georgia%20remain%20mired%20in%20uncertainty%20amid%20expanding%20legal%20fights%20over%20ballot%20counts%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Bogus Voter Fraud Claims”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102228>
Posted on November 13, 2018 8:56 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102228> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Factcheck.org:<https://www.factcheck.org/2018/11/bogus-voter-fraud-claims/>

With votes continuing to be counted in very close elections in Florida, Georgia and Arizona, President Donald Trump and some other Republicans have been crying foul, making false and misleading claims of supposed election fraud perpetrated by Democrats in an attempt to “steal” the elections.

There is no evidence of an organized effort by Democrats to “steal” elections, and the ballot counting is proceeding in due course. It often takes more than a week for counties around the country to count mail-in, absentee and provisional ballots. What’s unusual is that these ballots could tilt the results one way or the other. And in Florida, a mandatory recount has already been triggered in the elections for U.S. Senate and for governor.

Nonetheless, the president and other Republicans have been muddying the national dialogue and spinning the facts…
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102228&title=%E2%80%9CBogus%20Voter%20Fraud%20Claims%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


Is A Bigger House of Representatives a Good Idea? A Bad Idea?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102226>
Posted on November 13, 2018 8:53 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102226> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT Editorial says yes<https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/09/opinion/expanded-house-representatives-size.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage&fbclid=IwAR0_3Svhpv41cLZXIjgcyfSl-nrJ4tXWMfA8IUz2CU6rqdZ0W55Oox4xbOk>.

Jonathan Bernstein says no<https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-13/a-bigger-house-is-a-bad-idea?srnd=politics-vp>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102226&title=Is%20A%20Bigger%20House%20of%20Representatives%20a%20Good%20Idea%3F%20A%20Bad%20Idea%3F>
Posted in legislation and legislatures<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>


“Democrats Are Poised to Wipe Out Republicans’ North Carolina Gerrymander In Time for the 2020 Election”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102224>
Posted on November 13, 2018 8:47 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102224> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Mark Joseph Stern:<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/north-carolina-gerrymandering-lawsuit-anita-earls.html>

North Carolina Republicans have spent the last eight years ruthlessly undermining democracy in their state. The key to their extraordinary success is a series of partisan gerrymanders that dilute the power of Democrats’ vote, allowing the GOP to maintain a firm grasp on the state legislature. But Republicans failed to subvert the one institution capable of reversing this damage to fair representation: the state judiciary. Now voting rights advocates are poised to score a legal victory in North Carolina that could wipe out the GOP’s legislative gerrymander—with the help of civil rights attorney Anita Earls, who was elected to the state Supreme Court last week. The case could give Democrats a real shot at retaking the legislature in 2020, or at least contesting it on an even playing field.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102224&title=%E2%80%9CDemocrats%20Are%20Poised%20to%20Wipe%20Out%20Republicans%E2%80%99%20North%20Carolina%20Gerrymander%20In%20Time%20for%20the%202020%20Election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


Bethune-Hill II Roundup<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102222>
Posted on November 13, 2018 8:43 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102222> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Howard’s got it.<https://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/2018/11/13/#84120>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102222&title=Bethune-Hill%20II%20Roundup>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Trump’s Birthright Threat Is Real; Just look at what the United States is doing to American Samoans.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102220>
Posted on November 13, 2018 2:37 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102220> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Sam Erman and Neil Weare<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/trump-birthright-threat-american-samoa-puerto-rico.html> for Slate.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102220&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%E2%80%99s%20Birthright%20Threat%20Is%20Real%3B%20Just%20look%20at%20what%20the%20United%20States%20is%20doing%20to%20American%20Samoans.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Parsons Parses Supreme Court Decision to Hear Bethune Hill II, Another Racial Gerrymandering Case<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102218>
Posted on November 13, 2018 2:29 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102218> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here’s a guest post from Mike Parsons<https://its.law.nyu.edu/facultyprofiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=profile.overview&personid=49150>:

The Supreme Court today agreed to hear Va. House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/virginia-house-of-delegates-v-bethune-hill/>(“Bethune-Hill II”) and directed the parties to brief whether Appellants have standing.  This racial gerrymandering case challenging 12 Virginia House Districts (now winnowed to 11) returns to the Court barely a year-and-a-half after the Court remanded Bethune-Hill v. Va. State Bd. of Elections<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bethune-hill-v-virginia-state-board-of-elections/> (“Bethune Hill I”).

The standing question arises because the appeal is brought by the Virginia House of Delegates and the Speaker of the House—Intervenors in the action below.  Rather than defend the law, the Virginia Attorney General (AG) has moved to dismiss<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-281/66142/20181009120637844_18-281%20State%20Appellees%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf> the appeal after determining that continued litigation “would not be in the best interest of the Commonwealth” (given the court’s extensive factual findings, the time and expense of appeal, the need to begin preparing for the state’s primary elections in June 2019, and the fact that the map would only be in place for one more election before the 2020 census sparks a new round of redistricting).  The AG argues (1) there is no Virginia state law authorizing the House to represent the State’s interests, and (2) while Intervenors may have participated in the Bethune-Hill I defense, this is “fundamentally different from the ability to initiate an appeal to challenge [the legal status quo].”

On the merits, Appellants raise a host of questions (six in all, with sub-parts to boot<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-281/62625/20180904165950209_VA%20State%20Board%20Jurisdictional%20Statement--PDFA.pdf>) challenging whether the court conducted a sufficiently “holistic” predominance analysis, whether the court erred in its credibility and evidentiary determinations, and whether the 11 challenged majority-minority districts can be considered narrowly tailored.  While some (perhaps all) of these questions would seem subject to clear-error review (and Appellees argue as much<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-281/66316/20181009185024415_18-281MotionToDismissOrAffirm.pdf>), the Court has played fast-and-loose with its standards of review in past redistricting cases (as Justice Thomas noted in his Cooper v. Harris<https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1262_db8e.pdf>concurrence), and we may see the Court do so again here.

Why might the Court be interested in this case?  A couple possibilities:

(1) Boundary-Setting: Roberts and Alito have shown extraordinary deference to legislators in this area (too much, one might argue), and Appellants harp on this point in discussing both predominance (i.e., how exhaustive must a court’s findings be to justify holding race predominated) and narrow-tailoring (i.e., how much analysis must a legislature do to show it had “good reasons” to believe its use of race was necessary). The conservative wing of the Court may see this case as a good vehicle to emphasize just how reticent courts should be to step in and police these boundaries generally.  (Though, as in Cooper, Thomas’s view may diverge from the conservatives on this issue.)

(2) Revisiting Predominance: The “holistic” analysis that Appellants claim Bethune-Hill I requires courts to undertake is unwieldy (to say the least). In response, Appellees argue<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-281/66316/20181009185024415_18-281MotionToDismissOrAffirm.pdf> that predominance “does not require the court to explicate every jot and tittle of a district but, instead, to examine the broader context of each district, including its overall demographics and the principles that drove its configuration.”  Appellees seem right to argue that Bethune-Hill I’s “holistic” analysis does not demand the impossible; however, the Court they face today is not the Court they faced eighteen months ago.



Following Bethune-Hill I, I argued<https://moderndemocracyblog.com/2017/03/30/is-bethune-hill-a-major-voting-rights-victory-or-the-next-northwest-austin/> that litigants should be on the lookout for the Court to shift away from the nuanced, fact-intensive view of predominance that Kennedy held (where a district violates the Constitution when the “essential basis” for the lines drawn is race) and for the Court to shift towards the blunter, intent-alone view of predominance that Alito & Thomas hold (where a district violates the Constitution when it is created for a “racial purpose”).  The latter view risks making everydistrict drawn for VRA-compliance purposes presumptively unconstitutional.

Unfortunately, Bethune-Hill II may give the Court an opportunity to “clarify” how it views predominance—and perhaps “simplify” it in a dangerous way.   After all, Roberts and Kennedy joined Alito’s opinion in Cooper v. Harris (which subtly elides the difference between these two interpretations, see Slip Op. 3, n.1<https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1262_db8e.pdf>), and Gorsuch joined Thomas’s opinion in Abbott v. Perez<https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-586_o7kq.pdf> (where Thomas reiterated his long-held view that the VRA does not apply to redistricting at all).  Thus, Kavanaugh appears to be the only member of the Court who has yet to express an opinion on this key question.

Bethune-Hill I dealt with a critical interpretive question at the intersection of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act.  With Kavanaugh and Gorsuch weighing in on the case for the first time this term (and Kennedy gone), we may soon know where the future of racial gerrymandering jurisprudence is heading.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102218&title=Parsons%20Parses%20Supreme%20Court%20Decision%20to%20Hear%20Bethune%20Hill%20II%2C%20Another%20Racial%20Gerrymandering%20Case>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“150 Unfortunate Voters”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102215>
Posted on November 13, 2018 2:26 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102215> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

State of Elections:<http://electls.blogs.wm.edu/2018/11/13/150-unfortunate-voters/>

Hurricane Michael hit the Florida Panhandle in mid-October and had a lasting effect on the infrastructure and residents of several coastal counties. As a result of the devastation, Gov. Rick Scott issued an executive order<https://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SLT-BIZHUB18101809500.pdf> extending the deadline for early voting and increasing the number of early voting locations in eight<https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article221536055.html> hurricane-hit counties. Gov. Scott issued this executive order pursuant to the governor’s power under the Florida Elections Emergency Act<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.733>. However, Bay County Supervisor of Elections Mark Andersen<https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article221536055.html> went beyond the governor’s executive order and accepted roughly 150 ballots via fax or email. These electronically transmitted ballots were cast by voters who were displaced by Hurricane Michael.

Although Anderson’s actions may seem admirable, Florida law does not provide this option for voters displaced by a disaster. Under the Elections Emergency Act, the governor can implement several different remedies to facilitate safe and accessible voting: delaying the election (Fla. Stat. § 101.733 (2018)<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.733>), moving polling places (Fla. Stat. § 101.74 (2018)<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.74>), or increasing the number of polling places (Fla. Stat. § 101.74 (2018)<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.74>). However, authorizing voters to cast votes by fax or email is not a remedy available to the governor. Not all Florida voters are barred from voting electronically. In fact, military and overseas voters can choose how they would like their ballots transmitted (Fla. Stat. § 101.62(4)(c) (2018))<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.62>. In an emergency, the Election Canvassing Commission can adopt special procedures to facilitate absentee voting by military and overseas voters (Fla. Stat. § 101.698 (2018)<https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/101.698>). This means that an emergency may prompt the Election Canvassing Commission to facilitate voting by fax or email for military and overseas voters. Thus, it would appear that Florida law treats different classes of voters differently in emergency situations.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102215&title=%E2%80%9C150%20Unfortunate%20Voters%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


“Voting Rights Advocates Sue Pennsylvania to End Disenfranchisement of Absentee Voters”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102213>
Posted on November 13, 2018 2:23 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102213> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:<https://www.aclupa.org/news/2018/11/13/voting-rights-advocates-sue-pennsylvania-end-disenfranchisem>

Voting rights advocates filed a lawsuit today challenging a Pennsylvania law that makes it difficult for voters to vote by absentee ballot.  The plaintiffs include nine Pennsylvania residents, all of whom applied for absentee ballots on time but received the ballots either too close to or after Pennsylvania’s restrictive deadline for returning the ballots.

Pennsylvania law allows voters to apply for an absentee ballot up until a week before Election Day but requires that ballots be received by county election bureaus by 5 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day. According to the lawsuit, which was filed in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, Pennsylvania has the earliest deadline in the nation for returning absentee ballots. Other than Louisiana and Mississippi, every other state allows voters to submit their absentee ballots on Election Day or to have them postmarked by that date and delivered later.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102213&title=%E2%80%9CVoting%20Rights%20Advocates%20Sue%20Pennsylvania%20to%20End%20Disenfranchisement%20of%20Absentee%20Voters%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>


Florida Judge Orders Recount Deadline Extended in Palm Beach<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102211>
Posted on November 13, 2018 1:22 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102211> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Palm Beach Post:<https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/20181113/breaking-florida-election-judge-orders-recount-extended-for-pbc-to-nov-20>

A Leon County circuit judge has ruled that recounts in Palm Beach County for all state races in question<https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/20181112/florida-election-recount-trailing-by-37-votes-democratic-house-89-candidate-sues> be extended to Nov. 20, about five days after the original 3 p.m. Thursday deadline.

The order would include extending the recounting of the U.S. Senate race between incumbent Bill Nelson and Gov. Rick Scott, the governor’s race between Republican Ron DeSantis and Democrat Andrew Gillum and the race for agriculture commissioner between Democrat Nikki Fried and Republican Matt Caldwell.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102211&title=Florida%20Judge%20Orders%20Recount%20Deadline%20Extended%20in%20Palm%20Beach>
Posted in recounts<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=50>


Florida: “Nelson campaign files new lawsuit over unconventionally marked ballots”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102208>
Posted on November 13, 2018 11:06 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102208> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Hill:<https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/416456-nelson-campaign-files-new-lawsuit-over-unconventionally-marked-ballots>

Sen. Bill Nelson<https://thehill.com/people/bill-nelson>‘s (D-Fla.) campaign filed a lawsuit on Tuesday seeking to bar Florida’s top elections official from rejecting unconventionally marked ballots.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court by both Nelson and the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm in Tallahassee, asks a judge to ensure that the Florida Department of State does not disqualify ballots where selections are marked in different ways, so long as the voter’s intention is clear.

A ruling in the lawsuit could be key in determining whether numerous ballots are tallied if the Senate race in Florida goes to a hand recount.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102208&title=Florida%3A%20%E2%80%9CNelson%20campaign%20files%20new%20lawsuit%20over%20unconventionally%20marked%20ballots%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Facing Defeat, Maine Republican Sues To Block State’s Ranked-Choice Voting Law”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102205>
Posted on November 13, 2018 10:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102205> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NPR reports.<https://www.npr.org/2018/11/13/667435326/facing-defeat-maine-republican-sues-to-block-states-ranked-choice-voting-law>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102205&title=%E2%80%9CFacing%20Defeat%2C%20Maine%20Republican%20Sues%20To%20Block%20State%E2%80%99s%20Ranked-Choice%20Voting%20Law%E2%80%9D>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


“As recount politics heat up, two Florida election officials are the targets of online harassment”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102203>
Posted on November 13, 2018 10:55 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102203> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/11/13/recount-politics-heat-up-two-florida-election-officials-are-targets-online-harassment/?utm_term=.c7d872313e20>

Several pro-Trump Facebook pages and one Twitter account on Monday posted the home address and phone number of the Broward County, Fla., election supervisor who has been the target of blistering criticism from the president and other Republicans amid highly politicized vote recounts.

Posting the home address of Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes — a tactic called “doxing” — often is a step toward harassment of people in the public spotlight and is prohibited by Facebook, Twitter and most other online platforms. The incident came amid rising vilification of the top election official in Florida’s most Democratic county as the state recounts closely fought elections for the governorship and U.S. Senate.

Facebook confirmed Tuesday that it had removed personal information about Snipes after the incident was reported to the company. Twitter declined to comment. Two tweets from an account visible Tuesday morning were deleted by noon.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102203&title=%E2%80%9CAs%20recount%20politics%20heat%20up%2C%20two%20Florida%20election%20officials%20are%20the%20targets%20of%20online%20harassment%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Common Cause, North Carolina Democratic Party, Individual Voters Sue in North Carolina State Court Over Partisan Gerrymandering of North Carolina General Assembly”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102201>
Posted on November 13, 2018 10:31 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102201> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release:<https://www.commoncause.org/media/common-cause-north-carolina-democratic-party-individual-voters-sue-in-north-carolina-state-court-over-partisan-gerrymandering-of-north-carolina-general-assembly/>

Today, Common Cause, the North Carolina Democratic Party, and a group of individual North Carolina voters are suing the state of North Carolina over the partisan gerrymandering of legislative maps for both chambers of the North Carolina General Assembly. The lawsuit, which was filed in the Wake County Superior Court, challenges the 2017 redistricting plans as violating the North Carolina Constitution and seeks to establish new, fair state House and state Senate maps for the 2020 elections – maps that do not burden or penalize any voter or party based on their political beliefs or past votes. The National Redistricting Foundation, a 501(c)(3) affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, will be supporting the legal fees of Arnold & Porter, Perkins Coie, and Poyner Spruill as counsel for Common Cause and the voter plaintiffs in the lawsuit…

You can read the filed complaint here<https://www.commoncause.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Common-Cause-v.-Lewis-Complaint-FILED-Nov-13-2018.pdf>.

Given the Democratic majority on the elected North Carolina Supreme Court, this has a real chance of success
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102201&title=%E2%80%9CCommon%20Cause%2C%20North%20Carolina%20Democratic%20Party%2C%20Individual%20Voters%20Sue%20in%20North%20Carolina%20State%20Court%20Over%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20of%20North%20Carolina%20General%20Assembly%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Ranked choice voting may affect partisan outcomes, but it always helps voters”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102199>
Posted on November 13, 2018 7:37 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102199> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Rob Richie blogs.<http://ranked%20choice%20voting%20may%20affect%20partisan%20outcomes%2C%20but%20it%20always%20helps%20voters/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102199&title=%E2%80%9CRanked%20choice%20voting%20may%20affect%20partisan%20outcomes%2C%20but%20it%20always%20helps%20voters%E2%80%9D>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


Federal Court Orders Gwinett County, Georgia to Accept Absentee Ballots with Omitted or Incorrect Birth Year<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102197>
Posted on November 13, 2018 7:35 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102197> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Order.<https://cmgwsbradiojamiedupree.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/bourdeaux-ga1.pdf>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102197&title=Federal%20Court%20Orders%20Gwinett%20County%2C%20Georgia%20to%20Accept%20Absentee%20Ballots%20with%20Omitted%20or%20Incorrect%20Birth%20Year>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>


Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Bethune-Hill Racial Gerrymandering Case Again from Virginia, Raises Question About Standing<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102195>
Posted on November 13, 2018 7:10 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102195> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

From today’s order list<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/111318zor_19m2.pdf>:

APPEAL — JURISDICTION POSTPONED

18-281 VA HOUSE OF DELEGATES, ET AL. V. GOLDEN BETHUNE-HILL, ET AL. Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits. In addition to the questions presented by the jurisdictional statement, the parties are directed to fully brief the following question: Whether appellants have standing to bring this appeal.

Here is the jurisdictional statement<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-281/62625/20180904165950209_VA%20State%20Board%20Jurisdictional%20Statement--PDFA.pdf> (via SCOTUSBlog<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/virginia-house-of-delegates-v-bethune-hill/>).
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102195&title=Supreme%20Court%20Agrees%20to%20Hear%20Bethune-Hill%20Racial%20Gerrymandering%20Case%20Again%20from%20Virginia%2C%20Raises%20Question%20About%20Standing>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Redistricting Reform in a Democratic House”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102193>
Posted on November 13, 2018 6:23 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=102193> by Nicholas Stephanopoulos<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=12>

Here’s a post of mine in the HLR Blog<https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/redistricting-reform-in-a-democratic-house/> on redistricting legislation that the newly Democratic House could and should pass. I’ll have another post soon on voting rights reform in Congress.

Lastly, is it politically realistic for the House to enact redistricting reform? Ordinarily it isn’t. In general, the House majority party benefits from gerrymandering, and so has no interest in curbing the practice. (Consider how anti-gerrymandering bills<https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/redistricting-reform-tracker-congressional-bills> did under Republican control of Congress. They came nowhere near a floor vote.) But we’re about to enter an unusual period in which the House majority party is the victim<https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/extreme-gerrymandering-2018-midterm> of gerrymandering, and had to overcome this obstacle to win House control. This is just about the most auspicious scenario imaginable for reform. Democrats should be acutely aware of how gerrymandering has undermined their electoral prospects. They should know, too, that if they fail to act, their newfound majority could soon evaporate as Republicans’ structural advantages reassert themselves.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D102193&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20Reform%20in%20a%20Democratic%20House%E2%80%9D>
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_270948727]


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181114/9a4e1cca/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/20181114/9a4e1cca/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 92163 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181114/9a4e1cca/attachment-0001.png>