[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/27/18
Fredric Woocher
fwoocher at strumwooch.com
Mon Oct 29 15:51:43 PDT 2018
Me think you doth protest too much, Jim.
In Rick’s defense, I have gone back and re-read his piece, and I suggest you do so, too. He never “call[ed] . . . the dwindling number of conservatives on this list serve ‘racist,’” not even close. He called those in power, with the ability to condemn and perhaps stop Trump’s divisive appeals to racism, “cowards” for not doing so. He didn’t even say outright that Trump is a racist, only that racists think Trump is a racist.
And if you felt as strongly against racism as you profess to do in your latest email, then you would say something about it, too, rather than criticize and hurl false accusations at someone who – in a moment of grief and despair – spoke out the ugliness that is Trump.
Fredric D. Woocher
Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
10940 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2000
Los Angeles, CA 90024
fwoocher at strumwooch.com<mailto:fwoocher at strumwooch.com>
(310) 576-1233
From: Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of jboppjr at aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 2:28 PM
To: lminnite at gmail.com; IShapiro at cato.org
Cc: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/27/18
I am loath to continue this divisive thread, but I owe at least Rick an explanation.
Yes I thought that Rick's post claiming that Trump has encouraged 'racism' and violence was a "disgusting low." It was a "low," because I don't remember Rick ever calling Trump a "racist" of this list serve before. And it was "disgusting," ie "causing a strong feeling of dislike." because I strongly object to calling someone a "racist" and/or complicit in acts of violence, without clear justification. And I don't believe there is.
And his strong implication that people like me "across the aisle" are complicit in "racism" and "increased political violence and domestic terrorism," by not condemning Trump for advocating it, was frankly just too much.
And my objection has triggered the reaction Rick could have predicted, ie, an equally "strong feeling of dislike,"but not just of my position on what he said, but hatred toward me personally.
Now I understand that many liberals regularly call those who disagree with them "racist" and will charge them with calling for acts of violence when they chant "lock her up," as Rick did. So to them charges of "racism" are just normal political discourse.
But I take it seriously, because I take racism seriously. Racism has resulted in the degradation, enslavement, and death of millions of human beings throughout the history of our world. It is a monumental evil that exists today and must be destroyed. But to just hurl this charge at your everyday political opponent is to dilute it beyond recognition and diminish its power of condemnation. So if, in Rick's view, Trump, Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan, all the Senate Republican and me are all racist, then what are we to call Hitler and Stalin so that people will know what they did and the enormity of their evil?
But I did not join this list serve to hear the latest partisan charges and claims, to harangue each other on the latest political controversy, to suffer through more character assassinations, or to be treated to the current iteration of Trump Derangement Syndrome. When I want to hear this sort of thing, I listen to SiriusXM Progress.
I joined this list serve for election law news and information and to participate in the occasional debate and information exchange. I was never informed that this was a liberal only list serve on the important political issue of the day or just a forum for liberal virtue signaling.
So I do think that Rick has a special responsibility here to keep this list serve on topic and open to all. His gratuitous and unjust calling of the dwindling number of conservatives on this list serve "racist" does not serve the goals of "tolerance," "diversity," and "inclusion,"which I have been told over and over again were the hallmarks of the society liberals wanted to create.
Can we just get back on topic? Jim Bopp
In a message dated 10/28/2018 3:28:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time, lminnite at gmail.com writes:
I don't know how it happened - I'm a clutz when it comes to computer technology - but for reasons that honestly I do not understand, for years now, Jim Bopp's email has gone straight into my trash. I thought he had maybe moved into philanthropy and stopped posting to Rick Hasen's Election Law list. Did he ever explain what, exactly, was "disgusting" and "low" about Rick's commentary on the Trump-spurned festival of hate and violence engulfing the country?
And if anyone has any advice for how I can prevent Bopp's email from flying into my trash, please let me know off-list.
Lori Minnite
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:22 AM Ilya Shapiro <IShapiro at cato.org<mailto:IShapiro at cato.org>> wrote:
Good; HIAS helped bring my family over.
Ilya Shapiro
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies
Cato Institute
1000 Mass. Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20001
(o) 202-218-4600
(c) 202-577-1134
Twitter: @ishapiro
http://www.cato.org/people/shapiro.html
On Oct 28, 2018, at 11:13 AM, henry weinstein <henryelliotweinstein at gmail.com<mailto:henryelliotweinstein at gmail.com>> wrote:
I have been a participant in the Election List Serve since 2000. It has been an important source of illumination on issues vital to a democratic. I write to align myself with the comments my colleague Rick Hasen posted yesterday. I find it striking that the critics of Rick's post have nothing meaningful to say about hate and violence and the regrettable, ongoing growth of a fact-free universe in this country. The Pittsburgh shooter told police Jews were slaughtering his people. Pure hate-filled, white power fantasy. I just contributed to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society.
Henry Weinstein
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 10:30 PM Fredric Woocher <fwoocher at strumwooch.com<mailto:fwoocher at strumwooch.com>> wrote:
Well said, Larry. At some point, one can be silent no longer. Trump is a despicable human being who has set the tone and who has encouraged and unleashed the worst elements in our society. He has debased our country and what it should stand for. And those who continuously enable and apologize for him because he happens to give them tax cuts, deregulation, and conservative judges (or whatever other part of his agenda they may support) need to speak out before he destroys what’s left of decency in our country and our world.
Thank you, Rick.
Fredric Woocher
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 27, 2018, at 10:07 PM, "larrylevine at earthlink.net<mailto:larrylevine at earthlink.net>" <larrylevine at earthlink.net<mailto:larrylevine at earthlink.net>> wrote:
“All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good people to remain silent.”
Thank you, Rick, for speaking out and speaking up. Yes, this is a law list, but to those who want to raise that as a shield behind which to condone the white supremacist and white nationalism that is given purchase by the bombastic rhetoric that flows from Trump, I ask if you truly believe that a “condemnation of violence” is satisfactory atonement for three years for promulgating violence. This presidency has been devoid of decency and built on divisiveness. All people of good conscience need to condemn not just the shooting in Pittsburgh, but also that which has so clearly created the atmosphere that has emboldened the worst elements of our society. Donald Trump sings the siren song that is so clear heard by white separatists and white nationalists that it is fair to ask whether he isn’t in fact of them. If you truly think unsubscribing from this list is a proper response to one who has the courage to speak out in the face of evil, then I for one will not miss you.
Larry
From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>> On Behalf Of Ben Betz
Sent: Saturday, 27 October 2018 9:19 PM
To: jboppjr <jboppjr at aol.com<mailto:jboppjr at aol.com>>
Cc: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/27/18
Rick - thank you for wading in here so unabashedly and sharing with this list. You no doubt were aware there’d be political blowback and decided to make a moral case, speak the truth, and speak out *for decency* anyway.
Jim Bopp, shame on you.
Ben Betz
(Sent from phone - please excuse typos.)
On Oct 27, 2018, at 9:46 PM, jboppjr <jboppjr at aol.com<mailto:jboppjr at aol.com>> wrote:
Rick, this is a disgusting low for you. Jim Bopp
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note8, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>
Date: 10/27/18 5:04 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/27/18
Domestic Terrorism, President Trump, and the 2018 U.S. Midterm Elections<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101782>
Posted on October 27, 2018 1:54 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101782> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I am heartbroken for the victims of today’s domestic terrorist attack at the Tree of Life synagogue<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/us/active-shooter-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting.html> in Pittsburgh which has left 11 people dead. These people were praying and celebrating a recent birth with a bris. The killer apparently yelled “All Jews must die”<https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/10/27/pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting-suspect-identified/> as he opened fire.
This comes just a few days after two African-American patrons of a Kroger store were senselessly killed in Louisville Kentucky in another racist domestic terrorist<https://www.wave3.com/2018/10/25/kroger-shooting-accused-killer-held-m-bond/> incident after the shooter could not get into a predominantly African-American Baptist church. The killer at one point explained that “whites don’t kill whites.”
And of course these incidents come the same week as a man apparently obsessed with President Trump sent pipe bombs<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/technology/cesar-sayoc-facebook-twitter.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage> to those who have been frequent targets of the President’s inflammatory rhetoric, including former Presidents Obama and Clinton, Secretary Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kamala Harris, Rep. Maxine Waters, CNN, George Soros, and others. Fortunately, at least so far the bombs that have turned up in the mail have not exploded.
Ordinarily, the acts of a deranged individual who commits political violence should not be attributed to the elected official they support or who inspires them. Think, for example, of the shooter of Rep Steve Scalise<https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/14/homepage2/james-hodgkinson-profile/index.html> at the congressional baseball game who was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
But things with President Trump are different. He has refused to condemn anti-semitism and racism; he has encouraged chants of “lock her up” against his political opponent Hillary Clinton and against others; he has appeared with, and promoted the views of, those who blame George Soros and the Jews for immigration problems; he calls his political adversaries by demeaning names, especially African-American women opponents such as Rep. Waters. He has done these things even as this violence grows. He praised the body slamming of a journalist by Rep. Gianforte. He has shown no interest in bringing the nation together, suggesting that rather than “toning it down” he could “really tone it up.”<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/i-could-really-tone-it-up-trump-shows-little-interest-in-uniting-the-nation-during-crises/2018/10/26/6a859c38-d891-11e8-a10f-b51546b10756_story.html?utm_term=.e506260dc49c>
He has pursued a political strategy that is aimed at inflaming his base to try to win the election. He has even complained<https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/media-covering-bombs-halt-gop-momentum-midterms-trump-says> about how the pipe bombs could hurt Republican election momentum.
And he has brought many Republicans along with him, such as Kevin McCarthy, soon to be leader of Republicans in the House of Representatives. McCarthy, in a now-deleted tweet,<https://twitter.com/JJohnsonLaw/status/1056243096369987584> accused “Soros, Steyer, and Bloomberg” of “trying to BUY this election.” Such anti-Semitic tropes have moved from the fringe right wing to the center of the Republican party.
At the beginning of the Trump presidency, I had hopes that people like Speaker of the House Paul Ryan would have courage to speak out about these things, and actually take action to punish Trump for not strongly condemning the racism and violence Trump has encouraged. It hasn’t happened. There is the barest of hand-wringing by people like Senator Sasse and Senator Flake, and no consequences for Trump. Republicans in the Senate are fine to put up with the racism and inflammation toward violence if they get to pack the federal judiciary with conservative appointees.
There is reason to believe that if Republicans lose the House, Trump will only turn up the rhetoric, perhaps attacking the legitimacy of the election results, and trying to rile up his base more in an effort to preserve his presidency and maximize his chances for reelection. As ugly as things have gotten, they stand to get uglier.
It is time for people across the aisle to stand up to racism. So far people like Paul Ryan have been cowards. Maybe they will have more “courage” if it seems that Trump’s appeal to racism will cost the party its lock on power. But I would not have count on it. And in the meantime, increased political violence and domestic terrorism seems not only possible, but unfortunately likely.
May the memory of this weeks’ victims be a blessing, and may their deaths not be in vain.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101782&title=Domestic%20Terrorism%2C%20President%20Trump%2C%20and%20the%202018%20U.S.%20Midterm%20Elections>
Posted in social media and social protests<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=58>
Revelations from John Gore Deposition: “Jeff Sessions Told DOJ Not To Discuss Citizenship Question Alternatives”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101780>
Posted on October 27, 2018 1:13 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101780> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Hansi Lo Wang<https://www.npr.org/2018/10/27/661270003/jeff-sessions-told-doj-not-to-discuss-citizenship-question-alternatives> for NPR:
In a newly-released court filing <https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5022451-2018-10-26-Pretrial-Dckt-410-0> in preparation for the first trial<https://www.npr.org/2018/09/14/648016277/census-citizenship-question-trial-could-start-day-before-midterm-elections> of the citizenship question lawsuits, the plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote that John Gore testified<https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5022451-2018-10-26-Pretrial-Dckt-410-0#document/p12/a463373> out of court Friday that Sessions “personally made the decision to direct DOJ not to even meet with the Census Bureau to discuss alternative approaches.”
The attorneys cite Gore’s testimony to back up their claims that the decision to add the citizenship question was a misuse of the commerce secretary’s authority over the census and intended to discriminate against immigrant communities of color….
For decades, the federal government has relied on citizenship information to make sure the voting power of racial and language minorities is not diluted. Since the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, the Justice Department has enforced the law’s protections against discrimination by using estimates of U.S. citizens from a Census Bureau survey now known as the American Community Survey. About one in 38 households in the U.S. are required by law to complete that survey every year.
In its December 2017 letter to the Census Bureau<https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=4500011-1-18-Cv-02921-Administrative-Record#document/p675/a440934>, however, the Justice Department said that collecting citizenship data from every household through the once-a-decade census would be “more appropriate” to use for enforcing Voting Rights Act and redistricting.
Still, Gore does not seem sure if the data collected from the new citizenship question would be more accurate.
According to the plaintiffs’ filing<https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5022451-2018-10-26-Pretrial-Dckt-410-0#document/p37/a463374>, Gore testified Friday that “he does not even know if citizenship data based on responses to a citizenship question on the census will have smaller or larger margins of error, or will be any more precise, than the existing citizenship data on which DOJ currently relies.”
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101780&title=Revelations%20from%20John%20Gore%20Deposition%3A%20%E2%80%9CJeff%20Sessions%20Told%20DOJ%20Not%20To%20Discuss%20Citizenship%20Question%20Alternatives%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Department of Justice<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>
I Talked with Dahlia Lithwick for Slate’s Amicus Podcast About the State of Voting Rights in the US<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101778>
Posted on October 27, 2018 1:10 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101778> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Listen:<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/whats-coming-down-the-docket-at-scotus-and-why-the-midterms-may-be-neither-free-nor-fair.html>
Dahlia Lithwick talks with Slate’s own Mark Joseph Stern about what to look out for this term, and with Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/>, professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine, about how free and fair the midterm elections will be in light of recent Supreme Court rulings on voting rights.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101778&title=I%20Talked%20with%20Dahlia%20Lithwick%20for%20Slate%E2%80%99s%20Amicus%20Podcast%20About%20the%20State%20of%20Voting%20Rights%20in%20the%20US>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
Orange County, California: “They Want To Register Voters In Jail. The Sheriff Won’t Let Them Inside To Do It.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101776>
Posted on October 27, 2018 1:08 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101776> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
HuffPo:<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/register-to-vote-southern-california-orange-county_us_5bd22882e4b0a8f17ef5c9e2>
In California, people with a felony conviction can vote<https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-california/who-can-vote-california/voting-rights-californians/> as long as they aren’t currently incarcerated in state or federal prison, on parole, or in county jail for a parole violation. Otherwise-eligible jail inmates are permitted to vote by mail.
Torres is one of the roughly 6,000 likely eligible voters who are detained in the Orange County jail at any given time that the ACLU of Southern California is trying to reach through a program it calls Unlock The Vote<https://www.aclusocal.org/en/unlockthevote>. They face a big obstacle: The Orange County Sheriff’s Department, currently led by Sandra Hutchens, won’t let them set foot inside the jail to talk about voting. Instead they must wait outside, across the street, where they approach inmates as they’re released and ask them to register.
It’s a mission that, at times, can seem quixotic. Around 30 inmates were released that Friday; the ACLU registered only four. But even if a fraction of those 6,000 current or since-released inmates vote in November, it could make a big difference….
It doesn’t have to be this hard to register people in jail. Just north of Orange County, the ACLU has been allowed inside the Los Angeles County jail to register inmates. They estimate they’ve registered about 4,000 people there. Efforts in jails in Chicago<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cook-county-jail-voter-registration_us_5b6203ece4b0fd5c73d5c099> and New York<http://gothamist.com/2018/08/31/rikers_voter_registration_drive_wor.php>, among other places, have also added new voters to the rolls.
Those numbers add up. There are 700,000 people detained in jails across the country who are likely eligible to vote, but don’t know they can. Forty-eight states strip people of their voting rights after they’re convicted of a felony. But people can still vote while they’re awaiting trial in jail or if they’re serving time for a misdemeanor.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101776&title=Orange%20County%2C%20California%3A%20%E2%80%9CThey%20Want%20To%20Register%20Voters%20In%20Jail.%20The%20Sheriff%20Won%E2%80%99t%20Let%20Them%20Inside%20To%20Do%20It.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in felon voting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=66>
“Texas Civil Rights Project asks Secretary of State to take action on voting machines”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101774>
Posted on October 26, 2018 6:46 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101774> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Release:<https://texascivilrightsproject.org/release-texas-civil-rights-project-asks-secretary-of-state-to-take-action-on-voting-machines/>
Tonight, the Texas Civil Rights Project (“TCRP”) sent a letter<https://texascivilrightsproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/TCRP-Letter-to-SOS-10.26.18.pdf> to the Secretary of State asking that his office take immediate action to inform Texans regarding the straight-ticket voting issues on the Hart eSlate voting machines. The letter asks the Secretary to:
1. Devise a system to more proactively inform voters at polling places about this potential problem.
2. Substantially increase outreach efforts across the state to communicate more clearly to the public the reason some voters are facing this issue; the need for voters to check their ballot choices before submitting their ballot; and that voters should immediately ask for help from a poll worker if they encounter any issue.
TCRP initially heard of this issue after voters contacted the non-partisan election protection hotline at 866-OUR-VOTE. So far, TCRP has received reports from voters in six counties (Harris, Montgomery, Fort Bend, Travis, Tarrant, and McLennan) who either had this happen to them, or were concerned that it may have happened to them.
At a minimum, 5.1 million Texas voters in six of the largest counties in Texas that use Hart eSlate voting machines may be affected by this issue.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101774&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Civil%20Rights%20Project%20asks%20Secretary%20of%20State%20to%20take%20action%20on%20voting%20machines%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, voting technology<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>
Postcard Advises Arizona Democrats to Vote on Wrong Election Day<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101772>
Posted on October 26, 2018 2:52 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101772> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
<image001.jpg><https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes>
Adrian Fontes at RecorderFontes<https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes>
· 23h<https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1055937016049762304>
The Elections Department is advising voters to rely solely on official sources for information on the 2018 General Election. Some voters have notified us of receiving post cards like this one showing an incorrect date for the upcoming election:
<image002.jpg><https://twitter.com/RecorderFontes/status/1055937016049762304/photo/1>
<image003.jpg><https://twitter.com/AZs_Politics>
Arizona's Politics at AZs_Politics<https://twitter.com/AZs_Politics>
cc: @rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
2:48 PM - Oct 26, 2018<https://twitter.com/AZs_Politics/status/1055939372355215360>
•
4<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1055939372355215360>
•
See Arizona's Politics's other Tweets<https://twitter.com/AZs_Politics>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101772&title=Postcard%20Advises%20Arizona%20Democrats%20to%20Vote%20on%20Wrong%20Election%20Day>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Reports of Voter Intimidation at Polling Places in Texas”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101770>
Posted on October 26, 2018 2:33 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101770> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
ProPublica reports.<https://www.propublica.org/article/reports-of-voter-intimidation-at-polling-places-in-texas>
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101770&title=%E2%80%9CReports%20of%20Voter%20Intimidation%20at%20Polling%20Places%20in%20Texas%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
District Court and 2nd Circuit Reject DOJ Argument to Delay Census Citizenship Trial; Next Stop #SCOTUS?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101768>
Posted on October 26, 2018 2:29 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101768> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
View image on Twitter<https://twitter.com/hansilowang/status/1055934058902011904/photo/1>
<image004.jpg><https://twitter.com/hansilowang/status/1055934058902011904/photo/1>
<image005.jpg><https://twitter.com/hansilowang>
Hansi Lo Wang<https://twitter.com/hansilowang>
✔@hansilowang<https://twitter.com/hansilowang>
BREAKING: Three-judge panel of 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has denied Trump administration’s request to delay 1st trial of #2020census<https://twitter.com/hashtag/2020census?src=hash> citizenship question lawsuits. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman issued a similar ruling earlier today. Watching for #SCOTUS<https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash> action now...
2:27 PM - Oct 26, 2018<https://twitter.com/hansilowang/status/1055934058902011904>
•
202<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1055934058902011904>
•
142 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/hansilowang/status/1055934058902011904>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101768&title=District%20Court%20and%202nd%20Circuit%20Reject%20DOJ%20Argument%20to%20Delay%20Census%20Citizenship%20Trial%3B%20Next%20Stop%20%23SCOTUS%3F>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
More Trouble with Texas Voting Machines Not Accepting Straight Party Ticket Choice; State Blames “Operator Error”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101766>
Posted on October 26, 2018 1:51 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101766> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
ABC 13 reports.<https://abc13.com/4556377/>
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101766&title=More%20Trouble%20with%20Texas%20Voting%20Machines%20Not%20Accepting%20Straight%20Party%20Ticket%20Choice%3B%20State%20Blames%20%E2%80%9COperator%20Error%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Combination Among the States: Why the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an Unconstitutional Attempt to Reform the Electoral College”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101764>
Posted on October 26, 2018 1:38 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101764> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Patrick Valencia has written this article<http://harvardjol.com/2018/10/26/combination-among-the-states-npvic-unconstitutional/> for the Harvard Journal on Legislation.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101764&title=%E2%80%9CCombination%20Among%20the%20States%3A%20Why%20the%20National%20Popular%20Vote%20Interstate%20Compact%20is%20an%20Unconstitutional%20Attempt%20to%20Reform%20the%20Electoral%20College%E2%80%9D>
Posted in electoral college<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>
Kansas Voting Official Responds “LOL” to ACLU Request to Publicize Voter Help Line for Dodge City Voters<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101762>
Posted on October 26, 2018 1:29 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101762> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Wichita Eagle:<https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article220557195.html>
After the ACLU objected to Dodge City’s single, out-of-town polling place, the local official in charge of elections forwarded to the state an ACLU letter asking her to publicize a voter help line.
“LOL,” she wrote in an email to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s office.
As Election Day approaches, concerns are being raised in Kansas over voting rights and access to the polls. The movement and elimination of some polling places is sparking fears that casting a ballot may be more difficult for some this year.
Nowhere are worries greater than in Dodge City, where residents must leave town if they want to vote on Election Day….
Cox said she moved the polling location out of a concern for safety. And she said she didn’t mean anything when she wrote “LOL.”
“This was not done with any racial intention at all,” Cox said during an interview in her office on Gunsmoke Street downtown.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101762&title=Kansas%20Voting%20Official%20Responds%20%E2%80%9CLOL%E2%80%9D%20to%20ACLU%20Request%20to%20Publicize%20Voter%20Help%20Line%20for%20Dodge%20City%20Voters>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Redistricting Reform and the 2018 Elections”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101760>
Posted on October 26, 2018 8:32 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=101760> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>
The Harvard Law Review blog is running a Symposium on legal issues related to the 2018 election. Here’s my contribution<https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/redistricting-reform-and-the-2018-elections/>, which analyzes the different measures on the ballot to change the redistricting process in Utah, Missouri, Michigan, and Colorado. An excerpt:
Underlying the entire issue of redistricting is the question of what constitutes a fair map. The issue is not just whether voters will endorse independent redistricting commissions, but what substantive criteria those commissions will be instructed to use. This is not as straightforward a question as many people intuitively think. As a conceptual matter, there are two fundamentally different approaches to answering that question, and it is worth noticing the distinct approaches these various ballot measures embrace.
The first approach is what I have called<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/10/13/what-comes-next-in-the-fight-against-partisan-gerrymandering/?utm_term=.af93f5001a90> a process-oriented one. Redistricters would be instructed to take a set of criteria into account that reflect appropriate democratic values for designing districts, but that do not include partisan political considerations. Thus, in “partisan-blind” redistricting, districts would be designed to meet standards like equal population; compliance with the Voting Rights Act; keeping pre-existing political units (like towns, cities, and counties) together, to the extent possible; respecting communities of interest; and keeping districts reasonable compact and contiguous. Under this approach, a “fair” map would reflect these criteria, and whatever partisan political consequences resulted from such a process would not affect the fairness of the plan.
The second approach is instead focused on exactly those consequences: it is an outcome-oriented approach that would seek to ensure a map is “fair” in the sense that the likely outcome of elections under the plan would be that each political party would end up with roughly the same percentage of seats as the percentage of votes it received. Under this approach, many of the values listed above would be of secondary importance to the primary goal of seeking to design a map that would generate partisan outcomes that match each party’s share of the overall statewide vote. The “process-oriented” and “outcome oriented” approaches define two poles of the spectrum; one can imagine approaches that try to merge these approaches, though doing so risks becoming a muddle that leaves redistricters with a great deal of discretion unless the proper tradeoffs between these different objectives are identified with precision. But having these two distinct conceptual frameworks in mind is helpful in evaluating the different ballot initiatives. . . .
No other country<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/07/the-supreme-court-will-soon-consider-gerrymandering-heres-how-changes-in-redistricting-could-reduce-it/?utm_term=.4c4fcbdbd7ee> with single-member election districts like ours leaves the power to draw these districts in the hands of the most politically self-interested actors, the politicians whose power and seats will be affected. . . . But shifting to commissions cannot avoid the fact that substantive choices must still be made about how we ought to define fair maps and what criteria commissions, or any other redistricting body, ought to follow in order to design fair maps.
The proposals on the ballot in these four states agree that redistricting should be taken out of the hands of self-interested state legislatures. But they show that on the deeper question – what makes a map fair – there remain differences of view.
Error! Filename not specified.<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D101760&title=%E2%80%9CRedistricting%20Reform%20and%20the%202018%20Elections%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
<image006.png>
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
Henry Weinstein
Writer, Teacher
cell phone 323-445-7006
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20181029/2c717b55/attachment.html>
View list directory