[EL] ELB News and Commentary 5/8/20
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu May 7 20:54:12 PDT 2020
“Postal Service Pick With Ties to Trump Raises Concerns Ahead of 2020 Election”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111252>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:50 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111252> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/us/politics/postmaster-general-louis-dejoy.html>:
The installment of one of President Trump’s financial backers and a longtime Republican donor as the postmaster general is raising concerns among Democrats and ethics watchdogs that the Postal Service will be politicized at a time when states are mobilizing their vote-by-mail efforts ahead of the 2020 election.
The Postal Service’s board of governors on Wednesday night selected Louis DeJoy<https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2020/0506-bog-announces-selection-of-louis-dejoy-to-serve-as-nations-75th-postmaster-general.htm?mod=article_inline>, a North Carolina businessman and veteran of the logistics industry, to lead the struggling agency, which faces insolvency and has frequently drawn the ire of Mr. Trump<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/us/politics/trump-postal-service-amazon.html>. The president has been pushing the post office to increase prices on companies that use it to deliver packages, such as Amazon, and has threatened to withhold funding if sweeping changes are not enacted.
Those changes have failed to get off the ground, but with Mr. DeJoy at the helm there are growing concerns that the nation’s mail carrier could be weaponized.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111252&title=%E2%80%9CPostal%20Service%20Pick%20With%20Ties%20to%20Trump%20Raises%20Concerns%20Ahead%20of%202020%20Election%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Senate committee advances nomination of FEC commissioner”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111250>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:46 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111250> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Washington Post:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-committee-advances-nomination-of-fec-commissioner/2020/05/07/85c5f2be-9072-11ea-9e23-6914ee410a5f_story.html>
Senate committee Thursday voted to advance President Trump’s nominee to fill a vacancy on the Federal Election Commission<https://www.fec.gov/>, which would restore the agency’s ability to conduct official business.
The Senate Rules and Administration Committee voted along party lines to nominate conservative Texas lawyer James E. “Trey” Trainor III and move his nomination to the full Senate, three years after he was first named for the position.
The FEC, which regulates federal campaign finance laws, lost the ability to do its job in August, when the resignation of a commissioner left it unable to operate without its necessary four-person quorum.
The nomination of Trainor had been in limbo amid questions over his social media postings and a standstill among Senate leaders on the logistics of appointing commissioners. In March, the committee had held a rare public hearing on Trainor’s nomination, which served as the first step to confirm him to the position.AD
Trainor, an Austin-based elections lawyer, has pushed for less regulation of money in politics and fought efforts to require politically active nonprofit organizations to disclose their donors. Government transparency groups widely oppose Trainor’s confirmation.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111250&title=%E2%80%9CSenate%20committee%20advances%20nomination%20of%20FEC%20commissioner%E2%80%9D>
Posted in federal election commission<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
Florida: “Eatonville council challenger, who lost by one vote, alleges voter fraud”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111248>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:42 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111248> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Orlando Sentinel reports.<https://www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-eatonville-voter-fraud-lawsuit-20200507-4hc4fo72q5fsdi2iwzkabztpca-story.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111248&title=Florida%3A%20%E2%80%9CEatonville%20council%20challenger%2C%20who%20lost%20by%20one%20vote%2C%20alleges%20voter%20fraud%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“Trump intensifies war with Democrats over voting laws; The GOP has doubled its budget to fight Democratic lawsuits to $20 million.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111246>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:39 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111246> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Politico reports.<https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/07/trump-democrats-voting-laws-243517>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111246&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%20intensifies%20war%20with%20Democrats%20over%20voting%20laws%3B%20The%20GOP%20has%20doubled%20its%20budget%20to%20fight%20Democratic%20lawsuits%20to%20%2420%20million.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Courts, COVID-19 & Voter Suppression”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111243>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:32 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111243> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
You’ll be able to watch this program<https://baybookfest.secure.force.com/ticket/#sections_a0F3m00000zdcgNEAQ> I’m participating in for the Bay Area Book Festival on May 14 at 7 pm.
[cid:image002.jpg at 01D624B1.A8ADC4A0]
Program will air Thursday May 14th, 7:00 PM PST
Abdi Soltani, Alan Hirsch, Richard Hasen
Modrated by Lala Wu
We’ve all seen the images from the recent in-person election in Wisconsin: people lined up wearing masks, some holding signs saying “THIS IS RIDICULOUS,” as they risked deadly COVID-19 illness and violated a shelter-in-place order simply to exercise the right to vote. Perhaps the most disturbing part of this scenario was the fact that it wouldn’t have happened without a last-minute ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that rolled back an absentee ballot extension period that had been put in place expressly to mitigate contagion potential from in-person voting. With less than six months to go until the 2020 Presidential election, and with the COVID-19 pandemic expected to remain in full force, can we expect a repeat of the debacle in Wisconsin—this time, on a national scale? In the aftermath of 2013’s Shelby County v. Holder verdict that shattered the Voting Rights Act, how much can we rely on our courts as the last line of defense in our right to vote?
Three nationally recognized experts will lead us through the role of the courts in ensuring voters’ access to vital options like absentee ballots and early voting, and show us how everyday citizens can act now to shape the judiciary in the short and long term. Featuring legal scholar Richard Hasen, whose Election Meltdown was deemed “required reading for legislators and voters” by Kirkus in a starred review; Constitutional scholar Alan Hirsch, whose A Short History of Presidential Election Crises was praised as “lucid, balanced, and deeply informed” by Elizabeth Kolbert; and renowned civil rights leader Abdi Soltani, executive director of the ACLU of Northern California. Moderated by Lala Wu, whose Sister District Project enlists 40,000 women nationwide in the fight to win crucial state legislative elections.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111243&title=%E2%80%9CCourts%2C%20COVID-19%20%26%20Voter%20Suppression%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Election Meltdown<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=127>
“Going rogue; America’s Supreme Court considers the rights of ‘faithless’ presidential electors”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111241>
Posted on May 7, 2020 12:38 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111241> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Steve Mazie<https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/05/09/americas-supreme-court-considers-the-rights-of-faithless-presidential-electors> for The Economist.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111241&title=%E2%80%9CGoing%20rogue%3B%20America%E2%80%99s%20Supreme%20Court%20considers%20the%20rights%20of%20%E2%80%98faithless%E2%80%99%20presidential%20electors%E2%80%9D>
Posted in electoral college<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Election Day Nightmare?” I Talked Election Meltdown and COVID-19 for SF Chronicle Political Podcast with Joe Garofoli<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111239>
Posted on May 7, 2020 11:34 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111239> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Listen here.<https://cms.megaphone.fm/channel/itsallpolitical?selected=SFO1375234561>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111239&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Day%20Nightmare%3F%E2%80%9D%20I%20Talked%20Election%20Meltdown%20and%20COVID-19%20for%20SF%20Chronicle%20Political%20Podcast%20with%20Joe%20Garofoli>
Posted in Election Meltdown<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=127>
“Why We Need Postal Democracy”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111237>
Posted on May 7, 2020 10:04 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111237> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
David Cole<https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/05/28/why-we-need-postal-democracy/> in NYRB:
Why was there so much drama over such a minor election? And what does it portend for the momentous election coming in November? The answer is disturbing: in the coronavirus pandemic, Republicans may have discovered the ultimate voter suppression tactic. For years they have sought to erect obstacles to voting, imposing strict voter identification requirements, limiting registration opportunities, purging voter rolls, and opposing early voting—all ostensibly in the name of fighting in-person “voter fraud,” even though there is virtually no evidence that anyone unlawfully impersonates a voter at the polls. Many Republicans believe that low voter turnout favors them, because older and wealthier citizens, disproportionately Republican, vote more regularly than younger and poorer citizens, who tend to favor Democrats. But the suppression tactics the party has previously pursued pale in comparison to fear of contracting a deadly disease, which is certain to deter many people from going to the polls. And that’s apparently how some Republicans like it.
The obvious answer to the problem of how to preserve democracy in a pandemic is to expand voting by mail. Failing to make absentee voting in these circumstances available to all is an impermissible burden on the constitutional right to vote—just as providing only a single polling place for a large district would be. The Supreme Court has declared the right to vote “of the most fundamental significance under our constitutional structure.”1 <https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/05/28/why-we-need-postal-democracy/#fn-1> States must provide adequate opportunities to vote, and when they do not, even if the immediate cause is beyond their control, they violate the Constitution. For example, when a hurricane hit Florida during the last week of voter registration in 2016, the state was constitutionally required to extend the registration deadline.2<https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/05/28/why-we-need-postal-democracy/#fn-2> The usual deadline was permissible under ordinary circumstances but became unduly onerous in the emergency conditions created by the hurricane. The same rationale holds with respect to rules that restrict voting by mail. They might be reasonable in ordinary times, but not when the alternative is to risk contagion in order to exercise one’s right….
How states conduct an election by mail also will make a difference. The ACLU, of which I am the national legal director, has already filed five lawsuits to compel states to increase access to voting by mail during the pandemic. In our suit in Texas, a state court ruled that all voters may vote by mail. (The state had argued that fear of coronavirus infection was not a sufficient excuse.) In Missouri, Georgia, Virginia, and South Carolina, we are challenging various rules that make absentee voting unnecessarily burdensome in a pandemic, including requirements that an absentee ballot be notarized or witnessed, or that voters provide their own postage to return the ballot, a practice that requires people to pay to vote and will foreseeably reduce returns, especially at a time when many people may not have stamps on hand.
States must also develop procedures for absentee ballots that contain errors. Mailed ballots tend to have a higher error rate than in-person ballots, because there are no poll workers on hand to answer questions. The best practice is to notify voters who have committed an error and allow them to clarify their intentions within a reasonable time.
As the five states that already conduct their elections by mail have shown, it can be done. But perhaps the biggest factor in whether it will be done properly in November will be resources. The pandemic will lead to unprecedented numbers of absentee ballots, and dealing with them responsibly and securely will be costly. Wisconsin illustrates the problem. It received 1.27 million requests for absentee ballots, a ninefold increase over the previous election, and the state was unprepared to deal with that surge in demand. So if voting by mail is to work, states will need support. The Brennan Center for Justice has estimated that administering free and fair elections in November will cost approximately $2 billion.7<https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/05/28/why-we-need-postal-democracy/#fn-7> But in its first stimulus package, Congress provided only $400 million, and the second stimulus law includes nothing more. There is likely to be still more stimulus legislation in the coming months, but it is crucial that it include substantially more funds for election administration. Moreover, voting by mail requires a functioning post office—which may account for President Trump’s hostility to a bailout for that struggling but essential government service.
Some critics of voting by mail, including President Trump, claim that mailed ballots increase the risk of fraud. While there is virtually no evidence of fraudulent in-person voting, there is some evidence of fraud with mailed ballots. In North Carolina, for example, a 2018 election had to be rerun because a Republican operative had illegally collected and tampered with absentee ballots. But fraud in absentee ballots is also exceedingly rare. One comprehensive study by News21 identified about five hundred instances between 2000 and 2012—a period when billions of votes were cast. At that scale, five hundred isn’t even a rounding error. When measured against the cost of citizens being deterred from voting out of fear of infection during a pandemic, it cannot justify restricting voting by mail.
Moreover, there are steps that officials can take to prevent fraud. The election law scholar Rick Hasen, a professor at UC Irvine Law School, recommends that states investigate and prosecute abuse where they find it; send a ballot application rather than a ballot to all registered voters, thus limiting delivery of ballots to incorrect addresses; and restrict the number of ballots any one person can collect from others. Some such collection is necessary for persons who live far from postal service, including on Native American reservations, but the practice should be limited to avoid opportunities for significant tampering with or destruction of ballots.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111237&title=%E2%80%9CWhy%20We%20Need%20Postal%20Democracy%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>, election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“More than 800 public health experts call on Congress to fund mail-in voting”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111235>
Posted on May 7, 2020 10:01 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111235> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The Hill:<https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/496257-over-800-public-health-experts-call-on-congress-to-fund-mail-in-voting>
A group of more than 800 public health experts on Tuesday called on Congress to fund mail-in voting amid rising concerns about in-person voting related to the coronavirus pandemic.
The experts — made up of professors, phycologists and doctors led by the Center for American Progress — sent a letter<https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/2020/05/05061221/21DemocracyTeam_finalmailvotingandcovid19.pdf> to the House and Senate asking that states be given $4 billion to address moving to mail-in voting.
These funds would cover the mailing and printing of ballots, securing ballot request systems and staffing, among other issues.
“In order to ensure the integrity of the electoral process and protect the public health at the same time, it is incumbent on our leaders to prepare for a Presidential election by mail, in which ballots are sent to all registered voters, to allow them to vote from home and ensure their health and safety in the event of a new outbreak of SARS-CoV-2,” the public health experts wrote.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111235&title=%E2%80%9CMore%20than%20800%20public%20health%20experts%20call%20on%20Congress%20to%20fund%20mail-in%20voting%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
California: “Democrats Say Black Voters Are Being Disenfranchised In The Special Election To Replace Katie Hill In Congress”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111232>
Posted on May 7, 2020 9:37 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111232> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
LAist:<https://laist.com/2020/05/05/black_voters_disenfranchised_special_election.php>
However, no vote centers are planned for Lancaster, a high desert city which boasts one of the most racially diverse populations in the district, including a large African American community. According to the 2018 Census American Community Survey<https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=06&cd=25>, black residents make up about 7% of the 25th congressional district, while nearly 22%<https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/lancastercitycalifornia,US/RHI225218> of Lancaster residents are black.
Several centers are slated for the neighboring city of Palmdale [check the county’s map of vote center locations<https://locator.lavote.net/locations/vc/?id=4178&culture=en>].
“We find it concerning,” said Kunal Atit, a spokesperson for Democratic candidate Christy Smith in a statement. “[We] call upon the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk to review and rectify this oversight.”
Mark J. Gonzalez, who chairs the L.A. County Democratic Party, agreed.
“Lancaster is the single most diverse part of the district, and yet the nearest voting center is nine miles away,” he said. “Registrar Logan’s voting center placement decisions need to be consistent with our state’s focus on ensuring that every voter has the opportunity to exercise their right to vote… especially in communities of color.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111232&title=California%3A%20%E2%80%9CDemocrats%20Say%20Black%20Voters%20Are%20Being%20Disenfranchised%20In%20The%20Special%20Election%20To%20Replace%20Katie%20Hill%20In%20Congress%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“How to Punish Voters; The prosecution of individual voters for fraud is a trend that seems intended to intimidate.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111229>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:35 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111229> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josie Duffy Rice NYT oped<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/opinion/election-voting-rights-fraud-prosecutions.html>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111229&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20to%20Punish%20Voters%3B%20The%20prosecution%20of%20individual%20voters%20for%20fraud%20is%20a%20trend%20that%20seems%20intended%20to%20intimidate.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
“Supreme Court Unanimously Overturns ‘Bridgegate’ Convictions”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111227>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:32 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111227> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/us/supreme-court-bridgegate.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage>:
The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously overturned<https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-1059_e2p3.pdf> the convictions of two defendants in the “Bridgegate<https://www.nytimes.com/news-event/bridgegate-chris-christie>” scandal.
The case resulted from a decision in 2013 by associates of Chris Christie, then the governor of New Jersey, to close access lanes to the George Washington Bridge to punish a political opponent. The resulting scandal helped doom Mr. Christie’s presidential ambitions.
Closing the lanes was a wrong, the Supreme Court ruled, but not a federal crime.
The associates, Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni, were convicted of wire fraud<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/nyregion/bridgegate-conviction.html> and related federal charges for their roles in concocting a “traffic study” that caused extreme delays for motorists seeking to cross the bridge, the busiest in the world, from Fort Lee, N.J., to Manhattan.
The mayor of Fort Lee, Mark Sokolich, a Democrat, had rebuffed a request to endorse Mr. Christie, and this was his punishment….
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, said “the evidence the jury heard no doubt shows wrongdoing — deception, corruption, abuse of power.”
“But the federal fraud statutes at issue do not criminalize all such conduct,” she wrote. “Under settled precedent, the officials could violate those laws only if an object of their dishonesty was to obtain the Port Authority’s money or property.”
But, she wrote, “the realignment of the toll lanes was an exercise of regulatory power — something this Court has already held fails to meet the statutes’ property requirement.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111227&title=%E2%80%9CSupreme%20Court%20Unanimously%20Overturns%20%E2%80%98Bridgegate%E2%80%99%20Convictions%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Push to Revive FEC Could Curb Court Action on Campaign Finance”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111225>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:27 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111225> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ken Doyle:<https://about.bgov.com/news/push-to-revive-fec-could-curb-court-action-on-campaign-finance/>
Advocates of stricter campaign finance law enforcement fear a Senate Republican push to restore a quorum on the Federal Election Commission could thwart their ability to pursue alleged violations in court.
The Senate Rules and Administration Committee is expected to vote Thursday to advance Texas election lawyer James “Trey” Trainor to fill a GOP vacancy on the panel.
With his confirmation, an equally divided FEC could resume its pattern of deadlocking on enforcement cases, leading to dismissal of alleged violations of disclosure requirements and other campaign finance laws, says a campaign finance watchdog.
FEC staff lawyers would also be able to defend such dismissals in court and prevent alleged violators from being sued, said Adav Noti, a former commission staff attorney, who’s now chief of staff at the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center. Democrats and campaign finance groups said Trainor would likely vote to block enforcement action in key cases.
In the absence of a quorum, which the FEC has had for months, lawsuits “can mean faster enforcement and more meaningful penalties, as well as establishing binding precedent for future cases,” Noti said in an email.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111225&title=%E2%80%9CPush%20to%20Revive%20FEC%20Could%20Curb%20Court%20Action%20on%20Campaign%20Finance%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, federal election commission<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
Revised Version of My Forthcoming Georgetown L.J. Online Paper, The Supreme Court’s Pro-Partisanship Turn, Now Available<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111223>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:24 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111223> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3548858> at SSRN.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111223&title=Revised%20Version%20of%20My%20Forthcoming%20Georgetown%20L.J.%20Online%20Paper%2C%20The%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Pro-Partisanship%20Turn%2C%20Now%20Available>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Taking the Lead in Adopting Political Transparency in the COVID-19 Crisis”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111221>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:21 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111221> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bruce Freed and Karl Sandstrom.<https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/07/taking-the-lead-in-adopting-political-transparency-in-the-covid-19-crisis/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111221&title=%E2%80%9CTaking%20the%20Lead%20in%20Adopting%20Political%20Transparency%20in%20the%20COVID-19%20Crisis%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“The Real Vote Suppression Threat; The Supreme Court weighs whether Electoral College electors can vote their preference for president rather than the choice of their state.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111219>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:20 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111219> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Linda Greenhouse NYT column<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/opinion/supreme-court-electoral-college.html>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111219&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Real%20Vote%20Suppression%20Threat%3B%20The%20Supreme%20Court%20weighs%20whether%20Electoral%20College%20electors%20can%20vote%20their%20preference%20for%20president%20rather%20than%20the%20choice%20of%20their%20state.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in electoral college<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=44>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Social Science Quarterly: Mini-Symposium on Partisan Gerrymandering (with Free Access at the Moment)<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111217>
Posted on May 7, 2020 8:19 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=111217> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Wow this<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/15406237/2020/101/1> looks good:
Editorial<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12748>
· Keith Gaddie<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Gaddie%2C+Keith>
· Kirby Goidel<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Goidel%2C+Kirby>
· Kim Gaddie<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Gaddie%2C+Kim>
· Pages: 7
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12748>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12748>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12748>
Mini‐symposium on Partisan Gerrymandering
Free AccessIntroduction to the Mini Symposium on Partisan Gerrymandering<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12744>
· Richard L. Engstrom<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Engstrom%2C+Richard+L>
· Pages: 8-9
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12744>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12744>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12744>
Free AccessThe Meaning of “One Person, One Vote” or Let Us Split the Baby in Half: Evenwel v. Abbott<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12740>
· Henry Flores<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Flores%2C+Henry>
· Pages: 10-22
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Abstract<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12740>
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12740>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12740>
· References<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12740#reference>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12740>
Free AccessPartisan Gerrymandering: Weeds in the Political Thicket<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12743>
· Richard L. Engstrom<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Engstrom%2C+Richard+L>
· Pages: 23-36
· First Published: 30 October 2019
· Abstract<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12743>
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12743>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12743>
· References<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12743#reference>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12743>
Free AccessDetecting Florida’s Gerrymander: A Lesson in Putting First Things First<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12739>
· Robin E. Best<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Best%2C+Robin+E>
· Jonathan S. Krasno<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Krasno%2C+Jonathan+S>
· Daniel B. Magleby<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Magleby%2C+Daniel+B>
· Michael D. McDonald<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=McDonald%2C+Michael+D>
· Pages: 37-52
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Abstract<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12739>
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12739>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12739>
· References<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12739#reference>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12739>
Free AccessThe Efficiency Gap After Gill v. Whitford<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12742>
· Mark Rush<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Rush%2C+Mark>
· Pages: 53-67
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Abstract<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12742>
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12742>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12742>
· References<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12742#reference>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12742>
Free AccessMaking Partisan Gerrymandering Fair: One Old and Two New Methods<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ssqu.12741>
· Steven J. Brams<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/doSearch?ContribAuthorStored=Brams%2C+Steven+J>
· Pages: 68-72
· First Published: 27 January 2020
· Abstract<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12741>
· Full text<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12741>
· PDF<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ssqu.12741>
· References<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12741#reference>
· Request permissions<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/servlet/linkout?type=rightslink&url=publisherName=Wiley%26publication=ssqu%26contentID=10.1111%252Fssqu.12741>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D111217&title=Social%20Science%20Quarterly%3A%20Mini-Symposium%20on%20Partisan%20Gerrymandering%20(with%20Free%20Access%20at%20the%20Moment)>
Posted in redistricting<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>
--
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/20200508/61e41662/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/20200508/61e41662/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 126354 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200508/61e41662/attachment.jpg>
View list directory