[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/10/20

[Rick Hasen]

Texas: “US judge blocks Abbott order limiting ballot drop-off locations” (link to opinion)<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116577>
Posted on October 9, 2020 8:07 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116577> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Statesman:<https://www.statesman.com/news/20201009/us-judge-blocks-abbott-order-limiting-ballot-drop-off-locations>

A federal judge issued an order Friday night barring enforcement of Gov. Greg Abbott’s Oct. 1 proclamation that limited counties to one mail-in ballot drop-off location.

U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman said Abbott’s order placed an unacceptable burden on the voting rights of elderly and disabled Texans, who are most likely to request a mail-in ballot and to hand deliver those ballots early to ensure that they are counted.

These voters are also particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, the judge said.

“By limiting ballot return centers to one per county, older and disabled voters living in Texas’s largest and most populous counties must travel further distances to more crowded ballot return centers where they would be at an increased risk of being infected by the coronavirus in order to exercise their right to vote and have it counted,” Pitman wrote.

From the court’s order<https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Pitman-Order.pdf> on the Purcell timing issue:

Here, the Court has been asked, by Plaintiffs and Defendant County Clerks, to reduce or eliminate what would amount to executive-caused voter confusion on the eve of an election. Governor Abbott’s unilateral decision to reverse his July 27 Order after officials already began sending out absentee ballots and just days before the start of early voting in Texas has caused voter confusion. (See e.g. Hollins Decl., Dkt. 8-1, at 7). Even without declaratory evidence, it is apparent that closing ballot return centers at the last minute would cause confusion, especially when those centers were deemed safe, authorized, and, in fact, advertised as a convenient option just months ago. As such, the Court’s injunction supports the Purcell principle that courts should avoid issuing orders that cause voters to become confused and stay away from the polls. 549 U.S. 1, 4–5.

To the extent that this Court’s injunction to reinstate the ballot return centers does potentially cause confusion, the Court is satisfied that it would be minimal and outweighed by the increase in voting access. Since Governor Abbott closed previously-sanctioned centers, there is confusion: (1) confusion resulting from a voter trying to cast a ballot at a center she thought was open—because it used to be—but which is now closed or (2) confusion resulting from a voter trying to cast a ballot at a center that she thought was recently closed but is now open again.11 Between these two choices, the Court is of the opinion that the second scenario is the more favorable and just choice: it is the only choice that restores the status quo and likely reduces confusion on the eve of an election, and it results in a greater chance that a ballot can be cast at a ballot return center that was previously available to voters—after being vetted as safe and secure and publicly touted as a viable option to exercise voting rights. See Ely v. Klahr, 403 U.S. 108, 113 (1971) (affirming district court decision where “the court chose what it considered the lesser of two evils”).
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116577&title=Texas%3A%20%E2%80%9CUS%20judge%20blocks%20Abbott%20order%20limiting%20ballot%20drop-off%20locations%E2%80%9D%20(link%20to%20opinion)>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Pennsylvania Republicans Abandon Idea of Election Committee with Subpoena Pwer<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116572>
Posted on October 9, 2020 5:33 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116572> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP reports<https://twitter.com/timelywriter/status/1314706192845897728>. (Earlier coverage<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116013>.)
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116572&title=Pennsylvania%20Republicans%20Abandon%20Idea%20of%20Election%20Committee%20with%20Subpoena%20Pwer>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Inside the Trump Campaign’s Strategy to Make Voting a Tooth-and-Nail Fight”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116570>
Posted on October 9, 2020 5:19 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116570> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/us/politics/trump-campaign-poll-watch.html>:

When President Trump used the prime-time debate last week to urge his supporters to “go into the polls and watch very carefully,” he wasn’t just issuing a call for a grass-roots movement or raising the prospect of intimidation tactics at voting sites. He was also nodding to an extensive behind-the-scenes effort led by the lawyers and operatives on his campaign.

Over the summer, Mr. Trump named a new campaign manager, Bill Stepien, who was once a top aide to former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey before being fired<https://www.nytimes.com/article/bill-stepien.html> amid the “Bridgegate<https://www.nytimes.com/news-event/bridgegate-chris-christie>” scandal. Mr. Stepien swiftly elevated a group of lieutenants focused on using aggressive electoral tactics, moves that led Marc E. Elias, the leading election lawyer for the Democratic Party, to tweet<https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1285416667313577986?s=20> that Mr. Trump was “tripling down” on “opposing voting rights.”

One of the main architects of the effort is Justin Clark, whom Mr. Stepien promoted to deputy campaign manager. He has been viewed with suspicion among Democrats since he was recorded<https://apnews.com/article/af2f0ede054d8baebbe1bb6ca47b4895> last year saying, “Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” and adding that in 2020 the party would “start playing offense a little bit.”

Other key figures in the campaign include a senior aide who once oversaw a right-wing information-gathering operation for the conservative Koch brothers; an adviser who was involved in a secretive vote-challenge operation for President George W. Bush’s re-election campaign in 2004; and a campaign counsel who is coordinating a series of lawsuits aimed at preventing the expansion of mail voting.

With polls<https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/presidential-polls-trump-biden> showing Mr. Trump trailing Joseph R. Biden Jr. nationally and in most swing states, the president has increasingly focused attention on the voting process, declaring that the only way he could lose is if the election is rigged and refusing to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. With the election less than a month away, his campaign has moved the idea of voting irregularities to the forefront of both its ground operations and its legal strategy.

The campaign is trying to shape the voting process in many ways. Following the president’s lead, it has undertaken a legal and rhetorical assault on mail-in balloting, claiming with no evidence that it is rife with fraud. It is also pushing the boundaries of traditional poll monitoring in ways that many Democrats believe amount to voter intimidation. And it has put legal pressure on states to aggressively purge their voter rolls.

Campaign officials tried to downplay Democratic anxiety and insisted they wanted everyone to vote who wants to do so.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116570&title=%E2%80%9CInside%20the%20Trump%20Campaign%E2%80%99s%20Strategy%20to%20Make%20Voting%20a%20Tooth-and-Nail%20Fight%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


Federal Judge Rules Voters Can Drop Off Absentee Ballots in Missouri, Do Not Need to Use USPS<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116567>
Posted on October 9, 2020 4:21 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116567> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News<https://twitter.com/rlippmann/status/1314677275296628738>:

Court order.<https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7224564/Federal-Absentee-Lawsuit.pdf>

More in this story.<https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/federal-court-puts-halt-on-missouri-ballot-requirement-hours-after-state-high-court-endorses-it/article_93a28ec9-eb33-5cfe-b14e-13cba1548d96.html#utm_source=stltoday.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletter-templates%2Fbreaking&utm_medium=PostUp&utm_content=d140d1cca7e6a20f735fd0d11de75fa6a2ada4ec>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116567&title=Federal%20Judge%20Rules%20Voters%20Can%20Drop%20Off%20Absentee%20Ballots%20in%20Missouri%2C%20Do%20Not%20Need%20to%20Use%20USPS>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Judge: Minnesota 2nd District election to take place Nov. 3”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116565>
Posted on October 9, 2020 3:55 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116565> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP:<https://kstp.com/politics/federal-judge-rules-minnesota-second-congressional-district-election-2020-to-proceed-in-november-as-scheduled-after-candidate-death/5889479/?cat=1>

A federal judge ruled Friday that the election for Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District should proceed in November as originally scheduled, despite the recent death of a third-party candidate.

Democratic U.S. Rep. Angie Craig asked the judge to require that the election be held in November instead of being delayed until February — after the Sept. 21 death of Legal Marijuana Now Party candidate Adam Weeks triggered a state law that led to the postponement.

The court’s order is here<https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7224563-2nd-District-election-ruling.html#document/p2>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116565&title=%E2%80%9CJudge%3A%20Minnesota%202nd%20District%20election%20to%20take%20place%20Nov.%203%E2%80%9D>
Posted in court decisions<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=129>


“The mystery of a GOP congressman’s seemingly rent-free campaign office”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116563>
Posted on October 9, 2020 3:48 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116563> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico:<https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/09/jim-hagedorn-may-violated-election-law-428181>

For at least seven years,GOP Rep. Jim Hagedorn appears to have enjoyed rent-free use of a campaign office supplied by a political donor — which would be a clear violation of federal election law that comes amid mounting scrutiny of his finances.

In dozens of filings with the Federal Election Commission, as early as October 2013 and as recently as last month, Hagedorn has listed a basement suite in a downtown Mankato, Minn., building as his campaign’s headquarters: Suite 7 of the Brett’s Building at11 Civic Center Plaza. But election spending records show Hagedorn has reported no payments for the use of that space over the course of the past four elections he’s run to represent Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District, including his current race.

Hagedorn’s campaign and the former owner of the building struggled to explain the situation.In recent interviews, they insisted there had been no impropriety but gave conflicting accounts of why no payments have been disclosed. It all adds up to a portrait of, at best, highly irregular or sloppy spending practices; at worst, it’s a breach of campaign finance law. Nonpartisan ethics experts, meanwhile, expressed deep skepticism with Hagedorn’s actions.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116563&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20mystery%20of%20a%20GOP%20congressman%E2%80%99s%20seemingly%20rent-free%20campaign%20office%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Ohio county says nearly 50,000 voters received wrong ballots”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116561>
Posted on October 9, 2020 2:24 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116561> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico:<https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/09/ohio-county-wrong-ballots-428350>

Nearly 50,000 voters received incorrect absentee ballots in the county that is home to Ohio’s capital, elections officials said Friday as they promised corrected ballots would be mailed within 72 hours.

With about 240,000 ballots mailed, that meant one in five voters received a wrong ballot. The error happened Saturday afternoon when someone changed a setting on a machine that places absentee ballots into mailing envelopes, Franklin County elections officials said Thursday.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116561&title=%E2%80%9COhio%20county%20says%20nearly%2050%2C000%20voters%20received%20wrong%20ballots%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“The Undoing of Democracy? Populism, pandemic—and internal failings—threaten to unravel a form of government recently seen as ascendant around the globe.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116559>
Posted on October 9, 2020 1:56 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116559> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYU Law Magazine<https://www.law.nyu.edu/news/ideas/undoing-democracy-richard-pildes-samuel-issacharoff> on the writings of Issacharoff and Pildes.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116559&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Undoing%20of%20Democracy%3F%20Populism%2C%20pandemic%E2%80%94and%20internal%20failings%E2%80%94threaten%20to%20unravel%20a%20form%20of%20government%20recently%20seen%20as%20ascendant%20around%20the%20globe.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Some Call for a Less Partisan Election Chief in California”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116557>
Posted on October 9, 2020 10:36 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116557> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I commented<https://www.kqed.org/news/11841652/some-call-for-a-less-partisan-election-chief-in-california> on this story (beginning around the 2:55 minute mark) for KQED California report.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116557&title=%E2%80%9CSome%20Call%20for%20a%20Less%20Partisan%20Election%20Chief%20in%20California%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Former Special Forces sought by business group to guard polling sites in Minnesota, company says”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116555>
Posted on October 9, 2020 10:02 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116555> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/private-security-minnesota-election/2020/10/09/89766964-0987-11eb-991c-be6ead8c4018_story.html>

A private security company is recruiting a “large contingent” of former U.S. military Special Operations personnel to guard polling sites in Minnesota on Election Day as part of an effort “to make sure that the Antifas don’t try to destroy the election sites,” according to the chairman of the company.

The recruiting effort is being done by Atlas Aegis, a private security company based in Tennessee that was formed last year and is run by U.S. military veterans, including people with Special Operations experience, according to its website<https://www.atlasaegis.com/>.

The company posted a message through a defense industry jobs site<http://specopsnet.org/> this week calling for former Special Operations forces to staff “security positions in Minnesota during the November Election and beyond to protect election polls, local businesses and residences from looting and destruction.”…

The prospect of armed guards outside election sites alarmed election officials in the state. It is illegal in Minnesota for people other than voters and elections staff — or those people meeting the requirements<https://www.sos.state.mn.us/elections-voting/election-day-voting/rules-for-challengers/> to be a registered election “challenger”— to be within 100 feet of polling sites.

There are also laws against voter intimidation that could prevent armed civilians from being in the area even if outside the buffer, according to election officials in Minnesota.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116555&title=%E2%80%9CFormer%20Special%20Forces%20sought%20by%20business%20group%20to%20guard%20polling%20sites%20in%20Minnesota%2C%20company%20says%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“The Trump campaign can’t have poll watchers at Philly satellite election offices, judge says”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116551>
Posted on October 9, 2020 9:55 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116551> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Philly Inquirer:<https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/trump-campaign-philadelphia-lawsuit-ruling-20201009.html?utm_campaign=Philly.com+Twitter+Account&utm_source=t.co&cid=Philly.com+Twitter&utm_medium=social>

A Philadelphia judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s campaign does not have the right for poll watchers to observe activities inside the city’s new satellite election offices<https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/philadelphia-early-voting-locations-2020-election-20200918.html>.

The campaign sued the city<https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/trump-philadelphia-mail-in-ballots-offices-lawsuit-20201001.html> last week, arguing its representatives should be permitted inside the offices, where voters can request, complete, and submit mail ballots.

Common Pleas Judge Gary S. Glazer issued a ruling Friday denying the petition.

The lawsuit had echoed false claims Trump himself<https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/trump-poll-watchers-philadelphia-early-voting-20200929.html> made during last month’s presidential debate, when he said “bad things happen in Philadelphia.” The campaign argued it had a right to observe the offices because they were marketed as early voting locations.

A lawyer for the city argued during a hearing this week <https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/trump-lawsuit-philadelphia-elections-offices-20201006.html> that the offices are not official voting locations like polling places, and that campaigns have a right to observe the counting of mail ballots beginning on Election Day.

You can find the opinion at this link.<https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/glazer-order.pdf>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116551&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Trump%20campaign%20can%E2%80%99t%20have%20poll%20watchers%20at%20Philly%20satellite%20election%20offices%2C%20judge%20says%E2%80%9D>
Posted in court decisions<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=129>


“Twitter Will Turn Off Some Features to Fight Election Misinformation”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116546>
Posted on October 9, 2020 9:40 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116546> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/technology/twitter-election-ban-features.html>

Twitter, risking the ire of its best-known user, President Trump, said on Friday that it would turn off several of its routine features in an attempt to control the spread of misinformation in the final weeks before the presidential election.

The first notable change, Twitter said, will essentially give users a timeout before they can hit the button to retweet a post from another account. A prompt will nudge them to add their own comment or context before sharing the original post.

Twitter will also disable the system that suggests posts on the basis of someone’s interests and the activity of accounts they follow. In their timelines, users will see only content from accounts they follow and ads.

And if users try to share content that Twitter has flagged as false, a notice will warn them that they are about to share inaccurate information.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116546&title=%E2%80%9CTwitter%20Will%20Turn%20Off%20Some%20Features%20to%20Fight%20Election%20Misinformation%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Intelligence chief briefed lawmakers of foreign influence threats to Congress”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116544>
Posted on October 9, 2020 9:37 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=116544> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Hill:<https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/520302-exclusive-intelligence-chief-briefed-lawmakers-of-foreign-influence>

The nation’s top intelligence official briefed lawmakers last month that foreign influence campaigns targeting Congress were more expansive than previously known, but a lack of specifics has left some with questions, multiple sources tell The Hill.

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe<https://thehill.com/people/john-ratcliffe> led intelligence officials in separately briefing the House and Senate Intelligence panels behind closed doors on the threats, informing lawmakers that the burgeoning foreign influence threat is being perpetrated by the usual suspects: China, Russia and Iran, though he indicated that Beijing was the primary aggressor.

Ratcliffe gave ballpark estimates of how many lawmakers have been targeted, suggesting it is from the dozens to roughly 50. But in the briefings, he declined to identify which members of Congress were the targets and he did not indicate if one party was being more heavily targeted than the other.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D116544&title=%E2%80%9CIntelligence%20chief%20briefed%20lawmakers%20of%20foreign%20influence%20threats%20to%20Congress%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


--
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/20201010/020c3fb3/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/20201010/020c3fb3/attachment.png>