[EL] Breaking: SCOTUS to hear partisan gerrymandering cases; more news

[Rick Hasen]

Breaking: Supreme Court to Hear Partisan Gerrymandering Cases from North Carolina and Maryland in March<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103071>
Posted on January 4, 2019 12:10 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103071> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here is the Court order.<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/010419zr_4f14.pdf>

On what this means, see my tweet thread yesterday<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1081014887705280513>.

And see

The Next Threat to Redistricting Reform<https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/the-next-threat-to-redistricting-reform/>, Harvard Law Review Blog, Oct. 22, 2018

How Justice Kennedy’s Successor Will Wreak Havoc on Voting Rights and American Democracy<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/07/justice-kennedys-successor-will-wreak-havoc-on-voting-rights-and-democracy.html>, Slate, July 2, 2018


[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103071&title=Breaking%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20Hear%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20Cases%20from%20North%20Carolina%20and%20Maryland%20in%20March>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


Federal Court Blocks Maryland Law Aimed at Foreign Spending in Elections Requiring Online News Organizations, Including Plaintiff Washington Post, to Post and Collect Information on Spenders on State Political Advertising<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103069>
Posted on January 4, 2019 11:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103069> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

From today’s opinion<https://www.ifs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/McManus-Decision.pdf> granting a preliminary injunction in Washington Post v. McManus:

In May 2018, as Americans were continuing to learn the details of a far-reaching Russian campaign to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential contest, the state of Maryland enacted a new law to combat foreign interference in its elections. The law, known as the Online Electioneering Transparency and Accountability Act (the “Act”), sought primarily to curb foreign nationals’ exploitation of Facebook, Instagram, and other social media sites, but its reach was broader than that, extending to many established newspapers’ websites. It requires social media sites and news sites alike to self-publish information about the political ads they run and to make records about those ads available for state inspection. The Act’s passage into law spurred an immediate response from the Washington Post and other media outlets with an online presence in Maryland. The outlets (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought this action in federal court to enjoin enforcement of the portions of the Act applying to online publishers, primarily (but not exclusively) arguing that the disclosure and record-keeping requirements codified at Md. Code Ann., Elec. Law S 13-405 violate their First Amendment rights of free speech and a free press. The issue before me at this stage of the proceedings is whether Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction.] I conclude that Plaintiffs’ First Amendment claim is likely to succeed on the merits. This conclusion stems from my determination that the Act’s impositions on online publishers are subject to strict scrutiny and that they most likely would not withstand this form of judicial review. I further conclude that, even if I were to analyze the statute under the more forgiving standard of “exacting scrutiny,” the Plaintiffs have shown they would likely prevail. As I am satisfied, as well, that Plaintiffs have met the other requirements for preliminary injunctive relief, their request to preliminarily enjoin enforcement of section 13-405, as applied to them, will be granted.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103069&title=Federal%20Court%20Blocks%20Maryland%20Law%20Aimed%20at%20Foreign%20Spending%20in%20Elections%20Requiring%20Online%20News%20Organizations%2C%20Including%20Plaintiff%20Washington%20Post%2C%20to%20Post%20and%20Collect%20Information%20on%20Spenders%20on%20State%20Political%20Advertising>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“Republicans Seek to Boost Small Donations, but a Fragmented System Stymies Them”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103067>
Posted on January 4, 2019 9:56 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103067> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/04/us/politics/republican-campaign-donations.html>

Last year at this time, Republicans feared the “blue wave,” a surge of voter enthusiasm for Democrats in the midterm elections.

With the election over, and the fears of Republicans partially realized, the party’s worry has shifted to the “green wave:” $39.67 here, $39.67 there.

That’s the average donation to ActBlue<https://secure.actblue.com/>, the online fund-raising hub used by more than 90 percent of Democrats. Buoyed by ActBlue, more than 100 Democratic candidates outraised their Republican counterparts in hotly contested congressional races.

That kind of uniformity and heft in small-dollar donations — typically defined as $200 or less — was missing on the Republican side, a costly shortcoming that the party is now confronting after losing 40 seats, and control of the House, to Democrats….

Republicans still receive streams of money from super pacs financed by big donors like the casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, and through individual donors who send larger amounts. And the Republican National Committee exceeded the Democratic National Committee in fund-raising in the cycle nearly two to one. In addition, President Trump’s campaign is known for its prolific fund-raising

But individual Democratic candidates for House and Senate seats outraised their Republican counterparts overall, $1.4 billion to $880 million and a significant portion of the difference can be attributed to small donations whose impact has increased significantly.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103067&title=%E2%80%9CRepublicans%20Seek%20to%20Boost%20Small%20Donations%2C%20but%20a%20Fragmented%20System%20Stymies%20Them%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


“What Do Donors Want? Heterogeneity by Party and Policy Domain (Research Note)”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103065>
Posted on January 4, 2019 9:39 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103065> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

David Brookman and Neil Malhotra have posted this draft<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3288862> on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Influential theories indicate concern that campaign donors exert outsized political influence. However, little data documents what donors actually want from government; and existing research largely neglects donors’ views on individual issues. We argue there should be significant heterogeneity by party and policy domain in how donors’ views diverge from citizens. We support this argument with the largest survey of U.S. partisan donors to date, including an oversample of the largest donors. We find that Republican donors are much more conservative than Republican citizens on economic issues, whereas their views are similar on social issues. By contrast, Democratic donors are much more liberal than Democratic citizens on social issues, whereas their views are more similar on economic issues. Both parties’ donors are more pro-globalism than their citizen counterparts. We replicate these patterns in an independent dataset. These patterns can help inform significant debates about representation, inequality, and populism in American politics.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103065&title=%E2%80%9CWhat%20Do%20Donors%20Want%3F%20Heterogeneity%20by%20Party%20and%20Policy%20Domain%20(Research%20Note)%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“House Democrats Introduce Their Sweeping New Reform Bill”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103063>
Posted on January 4, 2019 8:26 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103063> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Paul Blumenthal<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-democrats-for-the-people-act_us_5c2eb491e4b08aaf7a97bff3?m3h> for HuffPost:

House Democrats<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/democratic-party> unveiled Friday the For the People Act, a comprehensive package of democratic reforms and the first major bill of the 116th Congress<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/congress>. The bill is a sweeping combination of election, campaign finance and ethics reforms designed to make voting easier, curb the power of big donors and reduce conflicts of interest in all three branches of government.

The For the People Act was the first major legislative action for Democrats after they voted to end the partial government shutdown<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/government-shutdown> initiated by President Donald Trump,<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/donald-trump> a measure he is expected to veto.

The package of reforms was put together in a collaborative process<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pelosi-democrats-campaign-finance-voting-rights_us_5c01c43fe4b04fb211681759> initiated by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/nancy-pelosi> (D-Calif.) in 2011 and overseen by Rep. John Sarbanes<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/john-sarbanes> (D-Md.) since 2017.

The reforms in the For the People Act would restore the right to vote<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/voting-rights> to millions of disenfranchised Americans and make it dramatically easier for people to vote while also creating a first-of-its-kind public financing system for House elections. It would also require presidential candidates to disclose 10 years of their tax returns….
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103063&title=%E2%80%9CHouse%20Democrats%20Introduce%20Their%20Sweeping%20New%20Reform%20Bill%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Panels to End Gerrymandering Could Reach SCOTUS Again”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103061>
Posted on January 4, 2019 8:20 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103061> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

USLW reports. <https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/panels-to-end-gerrymandering-could-reach-scotus-again-1>


[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103061&title=%E2%80%9CPanels%20to%20End%20Gerrymandering%20Could%20Reach%20SCOTUS%20Again%E2%80%9D>


--
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_1388299430]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190104/d688d07e/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/20190104/d688d07e/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 25207 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190104/d688d07e/attachment-0001.png>