[EL] ELB News and Commentary 6/10/19

[Rick Hasen]

“The Cybersecurity 202: Even a voting machine company is pushing for election security legislation” (But Mitch McConnell Against It)<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105550>
Posted on June 10, 2019 6:51 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105550> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2019/06/10/the-cybersecurity-202-even-a-voting-machine-company-is-pushing-for-election-security-legislation/5cfd75691ad2e5122b87c567/?utm_term=.ad5a949242d4>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105550&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Cybersecurity%20202%3A%20Even%20a%20voting%20machine%20company%20is%20pushing%20for%20election%20security%20legislation%E2%80%9D%20(But%20Mitch%20McConnell%20Against%20It)>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, voting technology<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>


“The Supreme Court’s Next Three Weeks Could Shake Up the 2020 Election”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105548>
Posted on June 10, 2019 6:49 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105548> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Greg Stohr for Bloomberg<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-10/high-court-thrust-into-2020-election-issues-as-term-nears-end>.

The U.S. Supreme Court enters the homestretch of its term with looming decisions that could affect the 2020 election and thrust the court even deeper into the nation’s political wars.

Between now and the end of June, the nine justices will rule on two intensely political issues — whether President Donald Trump’s administration can put a citizenship question on the 2020 census and whether federal courts can strike down voting maps as excessively partisan.


[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105548&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Next%20Three%20Weeks%20Could%20Shake%20Up%20the%202020%20Election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in census litigation<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=125>, redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Ginni Thomas Plans New Conservative ‘Supergroup’ to ‘Protect President Trump’<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105546>
Posted on June 8, 2019 4:33 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105546> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Intercept:

CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST VIRGINIA “Ginni” Thomas is launching yet another project to wage war on multiple fronts of America’s most heated cultural and political debates. This time, however, her plan will include a project to “protect President Trump” using at least two new campaign-related political entities, according to a presentation obtained by The Intercept and Documented

Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, unveiled the new venture in a closed meeting of GOP lawmakers, donors, and Christian-right leaders last month, seeming to make reference to the movement disarray and electoral losses suffered by conservatives in the Trump era — and the gains made by left-wing groups and politicians.

“Our house is on fire and we are stomping ants in the driveway. We’re not really focused on the arsonists who are right around us,” Ginni Thomas said.

Some of the most controversial icons in conservative circles will be involved with other branches of Thomas’s new project, which is dubbed “Crowdsourcers.” One such project is titled “Protect Our Heroes,” led by conservative filmmaker<https://theintercept.com/2018/10/18/james-okeefe-project-veritas-claire-mccaskill/> and provocateur James O’Keefe.

The node of the project focused on political campaigns — slated to do business under the name “American D-Day” — will be set up by Cleta Mitchell, a well-known Republican campaign finance lawyer and partner at the law firm Foley & Lardner. D-Day will include a 501(c)(4) arm that can solicit undisclosed donations and a separate PAC registered with the Federal Elections Commission.

O’Keefe and Thomas did not respond to requests for comment. Mitchell, in response to an inquiry from The Intercept, wrote that it was not her “role to answer any questions on this. Sorry.” Asked who to contact about the new venture, Mitchell wrote, “No one. None of your business.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105546&title=%E2%80%9CGinni%20Thomas%20Plans%20New%20Conservative%20%E2%80%98Supergroup%E2%80%99%20to%20%E2%80%98Protect%20President%20Trump%E2%80%99>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, tax law and election law<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>


Is DOJ Still Investigating Roger Stone’s 2016 “Stop the Steal” Voter Suppression Activities?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105544>
Posted on June 8, 2019 9:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105544> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Marci Wheeler on the tea leaves<https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/06/08/on-once-and-future-mueller-grand-juries/>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105544&title=Is%20DOJ%20Still%20Investigating%20Roger%20Stone%E2%80%99s%202016%20%E2%80%9CStop%20the%20Steal%E2%80%9D%20Voter%20Suppression%20Activities%3F>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“High court could cause Va. election drama, but likely won’t”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105542>
Posted on June 8, 2019 9:28 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105542> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP reports<https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/High-court-could-cause-Va-election-drama-but-13962124.php>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105542&title=%E2%80%9CHigh%20court%20could%20cause%20Va.%20election%20drama%2C%20but%20likely%20won%E2%80%99t%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


DOJ Settles Voting Rights Act Lawsuit with Michigan City Using Ranked Choice Voting<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105540>
Posted on June 8, 2019 9:19 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105540> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release<https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-agreement-city-eastpointe-michigan-under-voting-rights-act>:

The Department of Justice announced today that it has entered into an agreement to settle a voting rights lawsuit with the City of Eastpointe, Michigan. The Department’s lawsuit challenges the method of electing the city council in Eastpointe under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Under this agreement, the city will change its method of electing its city council to ensure compliance with the protections of Section 2.

The agreement, which must be approved by the federal district court in Detroit, was entered into by the parties to resolve the Department’s lawsuit with the City of Eastpointe filed in 2017. The Department’s complaint alleges the current method of election for the Eastpointe City Council results in black citizens in Eastpointe having less opportunity than white citizens to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of their choice to the city council, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Subject to court approval, the agreement will alter the method of electing the Eastpointe City Council, from a traditional at-large method of election to one that utilizes ranked choice voting beginning with the November 2019 election. Under the agreement, the city councilmembers will continue to be elected on a citywide basis, but under the new ranked choice voting system, Eastpointe voters will rank city council candidates in their order of preference. The agreement provides that the city will conduct a robust voter education program for the new method of election.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105540&title=DOJ%20Settles%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20Lawsuit%20with%20Michigan%20City%20Using%20Ranked%20Choice%20Voting>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>, Department of Justice<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>


“Australia’s elections show a way to come out on top”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105538>
Posted on June 8, 2019 9:17 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105538> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Rob Richie and David Daley<https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/447006-elections-down-under-show-a-way-to-come-out-on-top?amp&__twitter_impression=true>:

If May’s biggest political surprise was the new ruler of Westeros on “Game of Thrones,” the result in Australia’s national election were a close runner-up.
For weeks, opinion polls had predicted that the Labor Party would defeat the conservative Coalition led by the Liberal Party. But, just as with Brexit and with President Trump’s victory, the “experts” were wrong. Voters returned<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/world/australia/election-day.html> Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s government. Morrison promised strict controls on immigration, and economic stability through creating jobs and cutting taxes. He questioned whether Labor’s climate change policies and plans for higher taxes on the wealthy would slow three decades of economic growth.
Morrison earned his victory. Australia has the high voter turnout that comes with compulsory voting<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/world/australia/compulsory-voting.html> and the majority wins that come with ranked choice voting<https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)> (RCV).
Australia has used RCV for more than a century. Voters rank the candidates in order of preference. It takes 50 percent of votes, plus one, to win a House seat. If no candidate wins a majority with first choice support alone, candidates with the fewest votes get dropped and their votes count for their next ranked choices. You rinse and repeat until someone wins a majority, mimicking an “instant runoff.” Despite an average of nearly seven candidates per House race, RCV in Australia elects a majority winner every time.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105538&title=%E2%80%9CAustralia%E2%80%99s%20elections%20show%20a%20way%20to%20come%20out%20on%20top%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_1320638657]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190610/850402ed/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/20190610/850402ed/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/20190610/850402ed/attachment-0001.png>