[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/14/19

[Rick Hasen]

“The House Democrats’ Colossal Election Reform Bill Could Save American Democracy”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103173>
Posted on January 14, 2019 8:44 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103173> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I’ve written this piece<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/nancy-pelosi-election-reform-bill-save-democracy.html> for Slate. It begins:

The Democrats’ first order of business as they took control of the 116th Congress was introducing H.R. 1, the colossal “For the People Act.” This 571-page behemoth<https://democracyreform-sarbanes.house.gov/sites/democracyreformtaskforce.house.gov/files/HR%201_TheForthePeopleAct_FINAL.pdf> of a bill covering voting rights, campaign finance reform, ethics improvements, and more was a perfect reminder of just how much power the Constitution gives Congress to make elections better in this country and, sadly, of how partisan the question of election reform has become.

By beginning with election reform as “H.R. 1,” Democrats signaled their priorities as they took over control of the House of Representatives. The bill now has 221 co-sponsors<https://democracyreform-sarbanes.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/221-house-democrats-co-sponsor-hr-1-the-for-the-people-act>, all Democrats, including almost every<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-gain-40-house-seats-nbc-projects-tj-cox-wins-n944986> Democrat in the House. It’s disheartening that bipartisan movement on election reform is no longer possible and that few of the significant improvements in the bill stand a chance of becoming law until Democrats have control of the Senate and the presidency. Even then some of its provisions could be blocked by a conservative-leaning Supreme Court. But if and when Democrats ever do return to full power in Washington, H.R. 1 should remain the top priority. Though there is room for some improvements, the “For the People Act” would go an enormous way toward repairing our badly broken democracy.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103173&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20House%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20Colossal%20Election%20Reform%20Bill%20Could%20Save%20American%20Democracy%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


Call for Papers: Election Science Conference<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103170>
Posted on January 14, 2019 8:40 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103170> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Via email:

We are pleased to issue a call for papers for the 2019 Election Sciences, Reform, and Administration (ESRA) conference<http://web.sas.upenn.edu/esra2019/>. The conference will take place at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA on July 11–12, 2019. This is the third annual ESRA conference, with the 2017 conference hosted by Portland State University and Reed College and the 2018 conference hosted by the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The program committee for this year’s conference is Martha Kropf (University of North Carolina at Charlotte), Lia Merivaki (Mississippi St), Michael Miller (Barnard College), and Charles Stewart (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). The host committee at the University of Pennsylvania is comprised of John Lapinski, Marc Meredith, and Stephen Pettigrew.

This conference has two goals. First, to provide a forum for scholars in political science, public administration, and other fields who are working to develop rigorous approaches to the study of how laws and administrative procedures affect the quality of elections in the United States. Second, to build scientific capacity by identifying major questions in the field, fostering collaboration, and facilitating a network of senior scholars, junior scholars, and election professionals that can work together to address these questions.

Papers will be favored that are both methodologically rigorous and have practical implications for election officials. Previous conferences have seen innovative projects that address ongoing questions about the impact of election reforms on registration and turnout at the state and federal level, how the voter experience has been affected by recent waves of election reform, and how concerns about cost and security are shaping election administration.To help disseminate the findings to a wider audience, each presenter will be required to write a two-page brief summarizing their paper that can be posted on the ESRA web site.

People who are interested in proposing a research paper should submit an application form available here<http://web.sas.upenn.edu/esra2019/apply/>. The deadline to submit a research paper proposal is March 1, 2019.

There are a number of other ways to participate in the conference without presenting a research paper. Previous ESRA conferences have featured roundtable discussions by election professionals on election security, election day registration, modernizing registration, and the polling places of the future. We also need people to chair and act as discussants on our panels. Those who are interested in participating in a roundtable, chairing or discussing panels, or attending the conference in a less formal way should submit an application form available here<http://web.sas.upenn.edu/esra2019/apply/>. The deadline to submit application to attend the conference if you are not submitting a research paper proposal is April 12, 2019.

Funding to support the conference is provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab<http://click.liebertpubmail.com/?qs=ae0eef94e3bc0667245e9459940d97cc3b632ca1cb0fa92d6e4dec90b941304cab93ecaa518fbee136cd133495f155a7> and the Hewlett Foundation <https://hewlett.org/> as well as the Program on Opinion Research and Election Studies<https://www.pores.upenn.edu/> at the University of Pennsylvania. The conference has no registration fee for those who are accepted to attend. We hope to cover most of the travel, lodging, and meal expenses of most of the participants, pending notification from other funding sources.

Sincerely,

John Lapinski, Marc Meredith, and Stephen Pettigrew
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103170&title=Call%20for%20Papers%3A%20Election%20Science%20Conference>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Go the distance on civic reform: New York is taking strong steps for the first time in a generation; it must finish the job”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103168>
Posted on January 14, 2019 8:38 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103168> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Michael Waldman<https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-go-the-distance-on-democracy-reform-20190111-story.html> in the NYDN.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103168&title=%E2%80%9CGo%20the%20distance%20on%20civic%20reform%3A%20New%20York%20is%20taking%20strong%20steps%20for%20the%20first%20time%20in%20a%20generation%3B%20it%20must%20finish%20the%20job%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


ACS Event on Voting Reform Cancelled Because of Weather<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103166>
Posted on January 14, 2019 6:43 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103166> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Notice<https://twitter.com/acslaw/status/1084647354710609921>:
View image on Twitter<https://twitter.com/acslaw/status/1084647354710609921/photo/1>
[View image on Twitter]<https://twitter.com/acslaw/status/1084647354710609921/photo/1>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/973265955223728129/5epbqm9Y_bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/acslaw>
<https://twitter.com/acslaw>
American Constitution Society<https://twitter.com/acslaw>
✔@acslaw<https://twitter.com/acslaw>

<https://twitter.com/acslaw/status/1084647354710609921>


Due to the weather, we're forced to cancel tomorrow's event on #votingrights<https://twitter.com/hashtag/votingrights?src=hash> feat.: @JoshuaADouglas<https://twitter.com/JoshuaADouglas> @jamalgreene<https://twitter.com/jamalgreene> of @ColumbiaLaw<https://twitter.com/ColumbiaLaw> @rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen> of @marinakate31moderated by @pemalevy<https://twitter.com/pemalevy> of @MotherJones<https://twitter.com/MotherJones> https://buff.ly/2CamUxM <https://t.co/gVZ2mCIZMp>
<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1084647354710609921>
2<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1084647354710609921>
7:04 PM - Jan 13, 2019<https://twitter.com/acslaw/status/1084647354710609921>
<https://twitter.com/acslaw>
See American Constitution Society's other Tweets<https://twitter.com/acslaw>

Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103166&title=ACS%20Event%20on%20Voting%20Reform%20Cancelled%20Because%20of%20Weather>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Breaking: Without Noted Dissent, Supreme Court Declines to Hear Major Campaign Finance Case Out of Montana<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103164>
Posted on January 14, 2019 6:33 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103164> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Very good news for supporters of campaign finance contribution limits to candidates: the Supreme Court without noted dissent<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011419zor_8nk0.pdf> has turned down Lair v. Magnan, a case which could have been the basis to attack all individual contribution limits to candidates.

I wrote about that case here.<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaughs-supreme-court-tenure-could-mean-the-end-of-all-campaign-finance-limits.html>

I take this to mean that the Court does not want to wade into these controversial waters right now, not that the Court agrees with the 9th Circuit’s more permissive tests for such regulations.

Whew!
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103164&title=Breaking%3A%20Without%20Noted%20Dissent%2C%20Supreme%20Court%20Declines%20to%20Hear%20Major%20Campaign%20Finance%20Case%20Out%20of%20Montana>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


NY: “State Street: Albany Lawmakers Eye Campaign Finance Reform, but Activists Want More”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103162>
Posted on January 13, 2019 10:45 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103162> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WSJ<https://www.wsj.com/articles/state-street-albany-lawmakers-eye-campaign-finance-reform-but-activists-want-more-11547398800>:

Reformers are rejoicing that Democratic leaders of the State Assembly and Senate are set to approve a passel of bills to increase voter participation and tighten campaign-finance laws. But there’s still a push to go further on some issues, including the creation of a public-matching system to finance campaigns.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103162&title=NY%3A%20%E2%80%9CState%20Street%3A%20Albany%20Lawmakers%20Eye%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reform%2C%20but%20Activists%20Want%20More%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“Justices to Hear Civil Rights Challenge in Ballot Prosecution”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103160>
Posted on January 12, 2019 5:10 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103160> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

USLW:<https://www.bloomberglaw.com/document/X80LGF58000000?bna_news_filter=us-law-week&jcsearch=BNA%252000000168395cd4e8a76b7b5df3160000#jcite>

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up the case of a former Democratic county commissioner from New York State who was acquitted of forging absentee ballots during a 2009 primary election.

Edward G. McDonough says the special prosecutor falsified evidence during the pre-trial investigation, grand jury proceedings, and at trial in an attempt to convict him of dozens of state law felony crimes related to the forged absentee ballots.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-485/66725/20181012140206799_No.%2018-__%20Petition%20Appendix%2010-12-18.pdf> found McDonough didn’t bring his civil rights case fast enough.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103160&title=%E2%80%9CJustices%20to%20Hear%20Civil%20Rights%20Challenge%20in%20Ballot%20Prosecution%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“GE Opens Its Books on Political Spending”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103158>
Posted on January 12, 2019 5:01 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103158> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Agenda:<https://nmcdn.io/e186d21f8c7946a19faed23c3da2f0da/5006ff10fe6f450fa2f1f01321ac6b5a/files/news/in-the-news/CPA---Agenda---GE-Opens-Its-Books-on-Political-Spending---01-11-19.pdf>

On Tuesday, General Electric announced it would become more transparent — starting this month — by disclosing any contributions it makes to so-called social welfare organizations. That’s a category of nonprofit groups that often sponsors campaign outreach and political attack ads. In addition, GE pledged to announce when it contributes any dues or payments of $50,000 or more to trade associations in a year. That’s down from its previous $100,000 trigger.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103158&title=%E2%80%9CGE%20Opens%20Its%20Books%20on%20Political%20Spending%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


“Will Jocelyn Benson defend Michigan gerrymandering tactics she once fought?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103156>
Posted on January 12, 2019 4:59 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103156> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bridge:<https://www.bridgemi.com/public-sector/will-jocelyn-benson-defend-michigan-gerrymandering-tactics-she-once-fought?fbclid=IwAR1rMWXx02w5Ls8JuM8mxM5rE2stLzysfxqDFHWt1I-ZG8SBppeVu7GSiGk>

Nearly a decade after Republicans redrew Michigan’s political districts<https://www.bridgemi.com/public-sector/these-republican-insiders-split-1-million-design-and-defend-michigan-2011-maps>, a federal lawsuit is set for trial Feb. 5 to determine if they were illegally gerrymandered.

Just one hiccup. The new defendant in the case –  the one responsible for arguing that the districts are constitutional – is one of the biggest critics of the state’s legislative boundaries, and helped lead the fight against Republican redistricting in 2011.

When Democrat Jocelyn Benson was sworn in as Michigan’s secretary of state on Jan. 1, she inherited an ongoing lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters that seeks to redraw the state’s 14 congressional districts and more than 30 state Senate districts before the 2020 election.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103156&title=%E2%80%9CWill%20Jocelyn%20Benson%20defend%20Michigan%20gerrymandering%20tactics%20she%20once%20fought%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>


“Justice officials were briefed months ago on allegations against McCrae Dowless, operative at center of N.C. election fraud scandal”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103154>
Posted on January 12, 2019 12:07 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103154> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/justice-officials-from-washington-were-briefed-months-ago-on-allegations-against-mccrae-dowless-operative-at-center-of-nc-election-fraud-scandal/2019/01/11/4c333722-15db-11e9-a896-f104373c7ffd_story.html?utm_term=.52a1caef572e>

Nine months before allegations of absentee ballot fraud tainted a congressional race in North Carolina, the state elections board gave officials from the Justice Department’s main office evidence that the political operative at the center of the scandal had used similar tactics in 2016.

On Jan. 31, 2018, the chief of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, which oversees prosecutions of election crimes, met in Raleigh with state officials and U.S. attorney Robert Higdon, according to an elections board spokesman.

The following day, the state officials sent a public integrity lawyer an eight-page memo describing interviews with two campaign workers who said they were paid during the 2016 election to hand-deliver mail-in ballots to political operative Leslie McCrae Dowless. Under North Carolina law, only voters or their close relatives or guardians may deliver or mail in ballots. The memo also summarized interviews with three Bladen County voters who filed complaints saying those campaign workers had sought their ballots.

The meeting and follow-up email, obtained by The Washington Post under a public records request, are the first public indications that officials with the Justice Department in Washington were made aware of the allegations against Dowless. Dowless has emerged in recent weeks as a key figure in the absentee ballot scandal in Republican Mark Harris’s 2018 congressional bid. State elections officials and some voters have expressed frustration that federal prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office in North Carolina did not act more aggressively to pursue earlier complaints against Dowless and potentially stop him from working on campaigns.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103154&title=%E2%80%9CJustice%20officials%20were%20briefed%20months%20ago%20on%20allegations%20against%20McCrae%20Dowless%2C%20operative%20at%20center%20of%20N.C.%20election%20fraud%20scandal%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Department of Justice<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>


“Court decision in N.J. voter intimidation case could bring ‘new wave of voter suppression’ in 2020 election, expert says”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103152>
Posted on January 12, 2019 12:04 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103152> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Jonathan Salant<https://www.nj.com/politics/2019/01/court-decision-in-nj-voter-intimidation-case-could-bring-new-wave-of-voter-suppression-in-2020-election-expert-says.html> for NJ.com:

A federal appeals court has refused to bring back restrictions<https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/08/is_trump_violating_a_nj_election_law_court_case.html> on Republican National Committee voter activities set in motion 36 years<http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/08/is_trump_violating_a_nj_election_law_court_case.html> ago by a New Jersey gubernatorial race, a decision that an election law expert <https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/donald-trump-voter-suppression-plan-2020.html> warned could usher in “a new wave of voter suppression.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a decision <https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/dnc-3d-appeal.pdf> by District Judge John Michael Vazquez, who ended the court-ordered agreement, known as a consent decree, to prevent the Republican National Committee from targeting minority voters.

The Democratic National Committee had appealed the decision, saying that the judge did not allow its lawyers to interview additional witnesses to buttress its argument that the Republican National Committee violated the order during the 2016 election.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103152&title=%E2%80%9CCourt%20decision%20in%20N.J.%20voter%20intimidation%20case%20could%20bring%20%E2%80%98new%20wave%20of%20voter%20suppression%E2%80%99%20in%202020%20election%2C%20expert%20says%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“An Idea for Electoral College Reform That Both Parties Might Actually Like”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103150>
Posted on January 12, 2019 7:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103150> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ned Foley<https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/12/electoral-college-reform-conservatives-223965> in Politico Magazine (based on his forthcoming Oxford UP book, Presidential Elections and Majority Rule):

Americans have heard for years that the Electoral College is broken—just look at the presidential elections of 2000 and 2016, when the winner earned fewer votes nationally than the loser. We have also heard that, despite its flaws, this system won’t change anytime soon. Republicans generally oppose a national popular vote, which would both undermine them electorally and violate the Founding Fathers’ desire for the presidency to reflect America’s federalist structure as a union of separate states.

But here is an argument for Electoral College reform that might actually appeal to conservatives: Simply put, the way we currently elect presidents would horrify the early American authors of the U.S. electoral system, as defined in the 12th Amendment….

How to do so? It is the states that have the power to restore the Electoral College to its original intent—and to ensure that it better represents the will of the American people. To do so, they must commit themselves to this majority-rule principle: No candidate receives all of a state’s electoral votes unless the candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular votes.

There are many methods states can use to comply with this principle. They could have a regular runoff between the top-two candidates, held in late November, if no candidate received a majority in the initial popular vote. Alternatively, states could hold a preliminary vote—perhaps on the Tuesday after Labor Day—to clear the field of third-party and independent candidates, so that only the top two finalists appear on the November ballot. (This option would function similarly to the “top two” system that California and Washington state currently use for nonpresidential elections.) Or, states could adopt the kind of “instant runoff voting” procedure that Maine recently employed successfully for its congressional elections: Voters can rank their preferences among multiple candidates, so that a computer can tally which of the top two finalists receives a majority once all lower-ranked candidates are eliminated.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103150&title=%E2%80%9CAn%20Idea%20for%20Electoral%20College%20Reform%20That%20Both%20Parties%20Might%20Actually%20Like%E2%80%9D>
Posted in electoral college<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>


“Documents Show NRA and Republican Candidates Coordinated Ads in Key Senate Races”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103148>
Posted on January 11, 2019 9:44 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=103148> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Mother Jones:<https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/01/nra-republicans-campaign-ads-senate-josh-hawley/?fbclid=IwAR1zTv2O9BFoMvwdA-AWnGIHosaH9BpFaCa5aeIfSv1J7X12p3P5CvfkEgo>

The National Rifle Association appears to have illegally coordinated its political advertising with Republican candidates in at least three recent high-profile US Senate races, according to Federal Communications Commission records. In Senate races in Missouri and Montana in 2018 and North Carolina in 2016, the gun group’s advertising blitzes on behalf of GOP candidates Josh Hawley, Matt Rosendale, and Richard Burr were authorized by the very same media consultant that the candidates themselves used—an apparent violation of laws designed to prevent independent groups from synchronizing their efforts with political campaigns.

In December, the Trace<https://www.thetrace.org/2019/01/nra-coordinated-ad-efforts-with-gop-senate-campaigns/> and Mother Jones reported on a similar pattern of coordination<https://www.thetrace.org/2018/12/trump-nra-campaign-coordination/> between the NRA and Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. In that case, Trump and the NRA hired affiliates of the same company—National Media Research, Planning and Placement—to direct their ad spending. Employees of that firm, operating under different corporate identities, placed ads for both Trump and the NRA on television stations across the country, with the apparent goal of reinforcing each other’s message.

Representatives of National Media, operating under the name Red Eagle Media, also bought ads on behalf of the NRA in support of some of the group’s preferred Senate candidates, and simultaneously bought ads for those Senate candidates while acting as a supposedly separate entity called American Media & Advocacy Group (AMAG). In at least 10 instances across the Missouri, Montana, and North Carolina races, FCC records show that ad purchases for both the NRA and the Senate campaigns were authorized by National Media chief financial officer Jon Ferrell.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D103148&title=%E2%80%9CDocuments%20Show%20NRA%20and%20Republican%20Candidates%20Coordinated%20Ads%20in%20Key%20Senate%20Races%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>



--
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_380325509]


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190114/533d6781/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/20190114/533d6781/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 69922 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190114/533d6781/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3329 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190114/533d6781/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 92163 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190114/533d6781/attachment-0001.png>