[EL] ELB News and Commentary 6/11/19

Mon Jun 10 20:11:29 PDT 2019

“LDF Files Lawsuit to Ensure Black Voters Have Voice in Electing Judges to Highest State Courts in Arkansas”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105561>
Posted on June 10, 2019 7:51 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105561> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release<https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/ldf-files-lawsuit-to-ensure-black-voters-have-voice-in-electing-judges-to-highest-state-courts-in-arkansas/>:

Today, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF),  with co-counsel, Arkie Byrd of Mays, Byrd & O’Guinn, P.A., and the law firm of Shearman & Sterling, LLP filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Black voters challenging the method of electing judges to the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. The election processes for those courts have for decades denied Black voters an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect candidates of their choice, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The lawsuit is filed on behalf of individual Black voters, Marion Humphrey, Olly Neal and Ryan Davis, and two non-profit organizations, Christian Ministerial Alliance and Arkansas Community Institute, which are both dedicated to furthering racial justice in the state of Arkansas and empowering voters.

“Judges matter. Black voters in Arkansas have been consistently denied fairness and the opportunity to elect judges of their choice to the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals,” said Natasha Merle<https://www.naacpldf.org/about-us/staff/natasha-merle/>, Senior Counsel at LDF. “When the methods for electing judges result in diluting Black votes, Black voters are silenced. Arkansas must open the political process and provide avenues for fair voting for all of its citizens.”

Black residents comprise nearly 16 percent of Arkansas’ population, are geographically concentrated within the state, and consistently vote together in contested elections. But the methods for electing judges to the state’s two highest courts deprive Black voters from a fair opportunity to elect their candidates of choice. As a result, no Black candidate has ever been elected to the Arkansas Supreme Court.

“This case is about finally providing an opportunity for Black voters in Arkansas to elect our preferred judges,” said Marion Humphrey, a Plaintiff in the lawsuit. “We simply have not had that opportunity and changes to the process of electing the state’s highest judges will contribute significantly to providing justice and fairness under the law.”
LDF has for decades advocated on behalf of Black voters in Arkansas. In the 1990s, LDF successfully challenged Arkansas’s method of election for trial court judges in Hunt v. Arkansas. That case resulted in the creation of fair electoral methods for trial court judges. It also led to the election of eight Black trial level judges.  In 2017, LDF won a similar lawsuit against Louisiana state officials<https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/court-decision-in-louisiana-voting-rights-case-changes-the-course-of-history-for-black-voters-for-the-better/>, where an at-large voting model has prevented Black voters from having a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choice to a state court.

“The unfortunate reality is that, in Arkansas, Black voters have consistently been blocked from electing their candidates of choice to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals” said Arkie Byrd. “We seek to fundamentally change that reality with this lawsuit, just as we did for the state’s trial courts. For over 35 years the Little Rock law firm of Mays, Byrd & O’Guinn has been committed to enhancing equity and opportunity in our state’s judiciary. We are proud to continue that commitment into the 21st century by serving as local counsel in this newest litigation.”

Read the full complaint here<https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/uploads/CMA-v.-Arkansas_FILED-without-stamp.pdf>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105561&title=%E2%80%9CLDF%20Files%20Lawsuit%20to%20Ensure%20Black%20Voters%20Have%20Voice%20in%20Electing%20Judges%20to%20Highest%20State%20Courts%20in%20Arkansas%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“House Democrats consider bills to ‘safeguard democracy’ in response to Mueller report”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105559>
Posted on June 10, 2019 1:47 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105559> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NBC News<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-consider-bills-safeguard-democracy-response-mueller-report-n1014886>:

One likely piece of legislation would be framed as “Duty to Report,” requiring presidential campaign aides and entities to report foreign contacts and influence to law enforcement after Mueller identified numerous such interactions between Trump campaign aides and Russians in the course of the 2016 election that were never reported to the FBI, according to two aides familiar with the planning.

Also at the top of the menu is a package of legislation to address election security and obstruction of justice by a sitting president, potentially specifically prohibiting a president from interfering in law enforcement activity.

Other options under consideration are bills on pardon reform and facilitating intelligence sharing across agencies and state lines.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105559&title=%E2%80%9CHouse%20Democrats%20consider%20bills%20to%20%E2%80%98safeguard%20democracy%E2%80%99%20in%20response%20to%20Mueller%20report%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>

Little Steven Gets It<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105557>
Posted on June 10, 2019 10:48 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105557> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/95564935/Little_Steven_Candles_bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt>
<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt>
Stevie Van Zandt<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt>
✔@StevieVanZandt<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt>

<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>

It’s Buckley v Valeo that matters Cameron. Not Citizens United. Nothing changes, guns don’t disappear, the USA doesn’t become a true Democracy until Buckley/Valeo is overturned. Worst Supreme Court decision in history. And that’s saying something. @cameron_kasky<https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky>
<https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1137921130071617541>
Cameron Kasky<https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1137921130071617541>
✔@cameron_kasky<https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1137921130071617541>

Heyyyy social media is out here giving me anxiety again so I’m gonna dip but please have a wonderful week & spread tons of love & overturn Citizens United. Go be proud to be you because you are BEAUTIFUL ttyl<https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1137921130071617541>

<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1138072370177032193>
532<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1138072370177032193>
6:16 AM - Jun 10, 2019<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>
149 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>

[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1027236869476573184/PFqQJu6__bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
Rick Hasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
✔@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

 · 10h<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1138123807569301505>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1138123807569301505>

Little Steven gets it!
<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>
Stevie Van Zandt<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>
✔@StevieVanZandt<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>

It’s Buckley v Valeo that matters Cameron. Not Citizens United. Nothing changes, guns don’t disappear, the USA doesn’t become a true Democracy until Buckley/Valeo is overturned. Worst Supreme Court decision in history. And that’s saying something. @cameron_kasky https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1137921130071617541 …<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/1138072370177032193>

[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1027236869476573184/PFqQJu6__bigger.jpg]<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
Rick Hasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
✔@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

And if you are wondering what @StevieVanZandt<https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt> is talking about when it comes to Buckley v. Valeo, Citizens United, and campaign finance, I wrote a whole book about why the problem begins with Buckley's rejection of equality as a compelling interest https://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453 …<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>
<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1138139277483626497>
8<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1138139277483626497>
10:42 AM - Jun 10, 2019<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1138139277483626497>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>
[https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1138139314032861186/ZomSzpyV?format=jpg&name=800x419]<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>
Plutocrats United: Campaign Money, the Supreme Court, and the Distortion of American Elections<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>

From a leading expert on election law, a compelling answer to the dilemmas of campaign finance reform Campaign financing is one of today’s most divisive political issues. The left asserts that the...<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>
amazon.com<https://t.co/lgpxGUOvLl>

<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
See Rick Hasen's other Tweets<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105557&title=Little%20Steven%20Gets%20It>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“‘It felt like a big tide’: how the death tax lie infected Australia’s election campaign”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105552>
Posted on June 10, 2019 7:57 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=105552> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

This is a long, extensively detailed story<https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/08/it-felt-like-a-big-tide-how-the-death-tax-lie-infected-australias-election-campaign> from the Guardian Australia about the rapid spread on social media, in the closing days of the Australian election, of a completely false claim that the Labor Party had a secret plan to impose a 40% inheritance tax (called a “death tax” in the postings that spread the story). The Labor Party was aware of this issue as it was happening and took numerous measures to try to counteract it. At this stage, no one knows whether this widely circulated lie affected the outcome of the election — and perhaps we will never know.

This in alarm bell for the kinds of tactics we — the campaigns, the platforms, policymakers, and others — have to be prepared for in the 2020 election cycle.

Here is a brief excerpt from the story:

While the contest in 2016 was a harbinger, the federal election of 2019 will go down in history as Australia’s first post-truth campaign. Substantial numbers of people shared material on Facebook that had absolutely no basis in reality, and a lot of it was shared as personal communications between networks of friends, which means there is no requirement that the content be authorised in accordance with the electoral rules, even though it was clearly political communication.

The weaponising of misinformation through peer-to-peer sharing, and the lack of oversight or any meaningful intervention to stop it, suggests this is a significant weakness in Australia’s already lax electoral regime.

Political parties are vulnerable in an online environment akin to the wild west, and more importantly, citizens are vulnerable if they cannot sort fact from fiction.

Some Labor MPs still are not sure whether they lost support predominantly because of the contentious tax-and-spend policies Shorten advanced, or because of policies he never advanced – a deeply disconcerting experience and one with profound implications for democratic contests in the digital age.

And here is an excerpt on how Facebook responded in real-time to this issue:

Facebook’s fact-checkers review stories, detect mistruths, then take steps to limit their spread. They were quickly set to work on the death tax claim.

“AFP [a French news agency] fact-checked this claim in April, and the post was rated as ‘False’,” a Facebook spokesman said. “Based on this rating, people who shared the post were notified that it had been fact-checked and rated as false. As a result, the original post and thousands of similar posts received reduced distribution in News Feed.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D105552&title=%E2%80%9C%E2%80%98It%20felt%20like%20a%20big%20tide%E2%80%99%3A%20how%20the%20death%20tax%20lie%20infected%20Australia%E2%80%99s%20election%20campaign%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_265634778]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190611/5e74e216/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/20190611/5e74e216/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 16298 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190611/5e74e216/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2973 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190611/5e74e216/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 13853 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190611/5e74e216/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 92163 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20190611/5e74e216/attachment-0001.png>