[EL] 7th Circuit Wisconsin order; more news [correction]

Fri Apr 3 18:42:38 PDT 2020

My initial description of the 7th Circuit order was not clear. Here’s a rewrite that I hope is clearer:

You can find the 7th Circuit’s order at this link<https://www.scribd.com/document/454890107/Dnc-v-Bostlemann>. In the unsigned order (I don’t even see the names of the judges on the panel), the court denied a request to stay that portion of the extending the time for requesting an absentee ballot in the upcoming Wisconsin election by one day and extending the time for receipt of absentee ballots until April 13. The court granted a stay of that part of the district court’s order which allowed people who could not get witness certification for an absentee ballot request to provide instead an attestation that they were unable to do so. [This language has been tweaked to clarify the partial grant of a stay.]

From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
Date: Friday, April 3, 2020 at 5:52 PM
To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: 7th Circuit Wisconsin order; more news

Breaking: 7th Circuit Grants in Part, Denies in Part Order Modifying Wisconsin Election Procedures<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110403>
Posted on April 3, 2020 5:48 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110403> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

You can find the 7th Circuit’s order at this link<https://www.scribd.com/document/454890107/Dnc-v-Bostlemann>. In the unsigned order (I don’t even see the names of the judges on the panel), the court denied a request to stay that portion of the extending the time for requesting an absentee ballot in the upcoming Wisconsin election by one day and extending the time for receipt of absentee ballots until April 13. The court denied that part of the district court’s order which allowed people who could not get witness certification for an absentee ballot request to provide instead an attestation that they were unable to do so.

The appeals court noted that neither party appealed that part of the district court’s order declining to extend the date of the election.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110403&title=Breaking%3A%207th%20Circuit%20Grants%20in%20Part%2C%20Denies%20in%20Part%20Order%20Modifying%20Wisconsin%20Election%20Procedures>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Trump Comes Out Against Vote by Mail to Deal with Coronavirus, Citing “Cheating”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110400>
Posted on April 3, 2020 3:54 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110400> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Tamara Keith<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR/status/1246206814733185025>:
[cid:image002.jpg at 01D609E7.A5DA4990]<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR>
Tamara Keith<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR>
✔@tamarakeithNPR<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR>

President Trump coming out firmly against vote by mail. "I think a lot of people cheat with mail in voting," he said. The question was whether states should be prepared for all-mail voting in November if the pandemic is still a major problem.
86<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1246206814733185025>
3:43 PM - Apr 3, 2020<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR/status/1246206814733185025>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
84 people are talking about this<https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR/status/1246206814733185025>

Rough transcript<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246209828441243649>:
[cid:image003.png at 01D609E7.A5DA4990]<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
Rick Hasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>
✔@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen>

 · 1h<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1246209018403512320>

Anyone have the transcript of these remarks? https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246206706583056384 …<https://t.co/LNMptj9FqQ>
Josh Marshall<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246206706583056384>
✔@joshtpm<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246206706583056384>

Trump digs in on total opposition to mail in voting. Everybody will have to go in person with voter ID.<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246206706583056384>

[cid:image004.jpg at 01D609E7.A5DA4990]<https://twitter.com/joshtpm>
Josh Marshall<https://twitter.com/joshtpm>
✔@joshtpm<https://twitter.com/joshtpm>

[View image on Twitter]<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246209828441243649/photo/1>
13<https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1246209828441243649>
3:55 PM - Apr 3, 2020<https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1246209828441243649>
Twitter Ads info and privacy<https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>
See Josh Marshall's other Tweets<https://twitter.com/joshtpm>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110400&title=Trump%20Comes%20Out%20Against%20Vote%20by%20Mail%20to%20Deal%20with%20Coronavirus%2C%20Citing%20%E2%80%9CCheating%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Gov. Evers of Wisconsin Finally Calls Special Session of Wisconsin Legislature to Consider Primary Election Delay<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110397>
Posted on April 3, 2020 11:40 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110397> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

It is not clear why the governor waited so long, or what the Republican legislature will do. But an election under these conditions with in-person voting where voters are urged to stay home would be undemocratic and inhumane.

UPDATE: Republican lawmakers reject Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers’ call to stop in-person voting Tuesday because of virus threat<https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/04/03/tony-evers-calls-lawmakers-into-session-stop-person-voting/2940156001/>:

Gov. Tony Evers in a last-minute plea Friday asked state lawmakers to stop people from voting together on Tuesday to prevent thousands from being exposed to the coronavirus, but Republicans who control the Legislature said no.

The GOP leaders instead criticized Evers for also calling for the election to move to May 19 — a reversal from previously pushing to keep the election date in place — and not asking them to take action before Friday. Both said Tuesday’s spring election must be held to preserve democracy.

“Hundreds of thousands of workers are going to their jobs every day, serving in essential roles in our society. There’s no question that an election is just as important as getting take-out food,” Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said in a statement.

But Fitzgerald and Vos had no answer to how local election officials are supposed to keep people safe as a massive shortage of poll workers has resulted in the closure or reduction of polling locations, forcing more people to vote at a single site.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110397&title=Gov.%20Evers%20of%20Wisconsin%20Finally%20Calls%20Special%20Session%20of%20Wisconsin%20Legislature%20to%20Consider%20Primary%20Election%20Delay>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“The Roberts Court Has Made the Looming Coronavirus Election Crisis So Much Worse”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110395>
Posted on April 3, 2020 11:38 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110395> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

David Gans<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/john-roberts-supreme-court-coronavirus-election-crisis.html>:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder left a gaping hole in our Constitution’s promise of democracy and opened the door to rampant voter suppression. Now COVID-19 is making things exponentially worse.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110395&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Roberts%20Court%20Has%20Made%20the%20Looming%20Coronavirus%20Election%20Crisis%20So%20Much%20Worse%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>

“Wisconsin Braces for Election Day Amid the Coronavirus Chaos”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110393>
Posted on April 3, 2020 11:34 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110393> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Eric Lach<https://www.newyorker.com/news/campaign-chronicles/wisconsin-braces-for-an-election-day-amid-the-coronavirus-crisis> for the New Yorker.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110393&title=%E2%80%9CWisconsin%20Braces%20for%20Election%20Day%20Amid%20the%20Coronavirus%20Chaos%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Florida Settles Voting Rights Suit Over Student Voting<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110391>
Posted on April 3, 2020 9:04 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=110391> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release from Marc Elias via email:

You may recall that in 2018 we won a critical federal court case striking down the Florida Secretary of State’s ban on early voting sites being located on college campuses, while allowing them in any other government building.  The court held that the State’s policy violated the 26th Amendment by discriminating against young voters.  That case, which was sponsored and supported by Priorities USA Foundation, is now the leading 26th Amendment case in the country.  It resulted in 57,639 college students voting early on their campuses. In their paper, studying the effect of this victory, Mobilizing the Youth Vote? Early Voting on College Campuses in Florida<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__electionsmith.files.wordpress.com_2019_06_sppc19-5Fss2.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=XRWvQHnpdBDRh-yzrHjqLpXuHNC_9nanQc6pPG_SpT0&r=mJZthOcamSml7FV7KXYLE6P2EQrjV525p9lKVucDNWI&m=Xky2mO-xdLzoMsYRhr1pvWmoBUS5xMlKsnt9H34jGkQ&s=Ivi-zdPe5y_KlrwSovQ2Tr5cuHioUXzwvi1AkoUwJjo&e=>, Professors Enrijeta Shino and Daniel A. Smith found:

“[A] broad increase in the turnout of 18-22 year-olds who were exposed to the new opportunity to vote early in-person in facilities on the campuses of public universities and colleges. There is little question that after the eight SOEs and the participating college and university administrations built the new early voting locations, young voters came out to vote. In short, we find strong evidence that the extension of early in-person voting to college campuses in Florida in 2018 led to higher turnout, all else equal.”

Put succinctly, the professors concluded that:  “On-campus early voting increases turnout, especially among young voters.” This finding, while intuitive, should help guide all of us who are looking to increase young voter turnout and ensure the dream of the 26th Amendment is fulfilled.

Last summer the Florida legislature passed a new law aimed at preventing early voting site on college campuses. They added a new  requirement that any early voting locations must “provide sufficient nonpermitted parking to accommodate the anticipated amount of voters.”  They did this because during our first lawsuit, the Florida Secretary of State repeatedly cited limited parking as an excuse for the prohibition on on-campus early voting, claiming it was the lack of non-permitted on-campus parking—rather than an intent to discriminate against young voters—that motivated the Secretary’s position that the University of Florida’s Reitz Student Union and other on-campus locations like it were inappropriate for early voting. The Court found that the Secretary’s stated interest in “alleviating parking difficulties that an on-campus early voting site might create” by prohibiting on-campus early voting, “is neither precise nor sufficiently weighty” to justify the prohibition.

We immediately sued to block the new law on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Florida, Andrew Goodman Foundation, and individual young voters  (sponsored by Priorities USA Foundation). I am pleased to announce that we have now settled that case.  As one part of that settlement, last night the Florida Secretary of State issued a new directive<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.democracydocket.com_florida_&d=DwMGaQ&c=XRWvQHnpdBDRh-yzrHjqLpXuHNC_9nanQc6pPG_SpT0&r=mJZthOcamSml7FV7KXYLE6P2EQrjV525p9lKVucDNWI&m=Xky2mO-xdLzoMsYRhr1pvWmoBUS5xMlKsnt9H34jGkQ&s=HLbcMdu2OHtAeE9V63Iti0C7_4kr7igy0hvfVBT0vvs&e=> interpreting the new law.  It reads, in part:

Finally, the Secretary clarifies that to the extent any supervisor of elections interpreted prior directives from the Division of Elections that related to Reitz Union as indicating that buildings such as student unions are not appropriate sites for early voting, those directives are withdrawn in their entirety. There is nothing in Florida law that prohibits the use of on-campus sites for early voting, provided that the requirements of Section 101.657(1)(a) are otherwise met.

In sum, Section 101.657(1)(a) should be read to permit supervisors of elections to place early voting sites on college and university campuses, consistent with the purpose of each county having a network or combination of early voting sites placed so as to provide all voters in the county an equal opportunity to cast a ballot.  Further, the Nonpermitted Parking Language emphasized in paragraph 4 above is a matter properly considered in light of the surrounding population of voters anticipated to use a particular early voting site and the availability of nonpermitted parking at other early voting sites in the county that may be used by voters who travel to the polls by car. …
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D110391&title=Florida%20Settles%20Voting%20Rights%20Suit%20Over%20Student%20Voting>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>

--
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/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2022 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3330 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10628 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3330 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 172862 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200404/2a2d7804/attachment-0002.png>