[EL] ELB News and Commentary 6/15/21

[Rick Hasen]

Must-Read NYT: “Trump Pressed Official to Wield Justice Dept. to Back Election Claims “<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122652>
Posted on June 15, 2021 7:14 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122652> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Katie Benner:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/15/us/politics/trump-justice-department-election.html>

An hour before President Donald J. Trump announced in December that William P. Barr would step down as attorney general, the president began pressuring Mr. Barr’s eventual replacement to have the Justice Department take up his false claims of election fraud<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/31/us/trump-election-lie.html>.

Mr. Trump sent an email via his assistant to Jeffrey A. Rosen<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/politics/jeffrey-rosen-justice-department.html>, the incoming acting attorney general, that contained documents purporting to show evidence of election fraud in northern Michigan — the same claims that a federal judge had thrown out a week earlier in a lawsuit filed by one of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyers.

Another email from Mr. Trump to Mr. Rosen followed two weeks later, again via the president’s assistant, that included a draft of a brief that Mr. Trump wanted the Justice Department to file to the Supreme Court. It argued, among other things, that state officials had used the pandemic to weaken election security and pave the way for widespread election fraud.

The draft echoed claims in a lawsuit in Texas<https://www.texastribune.org/2020/12/11/texas-lawsuit-supreme-court-election-results/> by the Trump-allied state attorney general that the justices had thrown out, and a lawyer who had helped on that effort later tried with increasing urgency to track down Mr. Rosen at the Justice Department, saying he had been dispatched by Mr. Trump to speak with him.

The emails, turned over by the Justice Department to investigators on the House Oversight Committee and obtained by The New York Times, show how Mr. Trump pressured Mr. Rosen to put the power of the Justice Department behind lawsuits that had already failed to try to prove his false claims that extensive voter fraud had affected the election results.

They are also the latest example of Mr. Trump’s frenzied drive to subvert the election results in the final weeks of his presidency, including ratcheting up pressure on the Justice Department. And they show that Mr. Trump flouted an established anticorruption norm that the Justice Department acts independently of the White House on criminal investigations or law enforcement actions, a gap that steadily eroded<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/us/politics/william-barr-justice-department.html> during Mr. Trump’s term.

The documents dovetail with emails around the same time<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/05/us/politics/mark-meadows-justice-department-election.html> from Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, asking Mr. Rosen to examine unfounded conspiracy theories about the election, including one that claimed people associated with an Italian defense contractor were able to use satellite technology to tamper with U.S. voting equipment from Europe.

Much of the correspondence also occurred during a tense week within the Justice Department, when Mr. Rosen and his top deputies realized that one of their peers had plotted with Mr. Trump to first oust Mr. Rosen<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/politics/jeffrey-clark-trump-justice-department-election.html> and then to try to use federal law enforcement to force Georgia to overturn its election results. Mr. Trump nearly replaced Mr. Rosen with that colleague, Jeffrey Clark, then the acting head of the civil division.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122652&title=Must-Read%20NYT%3A%20%E2%80%9CTrump%20Pressed%20Official%20to%20Wield%20Justice%20Dept.%20to%20Back%20Election%20Claims%20%E2%80%9C>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“The GOP’s increasingly blunt argument: It needs voting restrictions to win”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122650>
Posted on June 15, 2021 7:07 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122650> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Aaron Blake<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/14/gops-increasingly-blunt-argument-it-needs-voting-restrictions-win/> for WaPo.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122650&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20GOP%E2%80%99s%20increasingly%20blunt%20argument%3A%20It%20needs%20voting%20restrictions%20to%20win%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“McConnell: ‘Highly unlikely’ I would let Biden fill supreme court seat in 2024”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122648>
Posted on June 15, 2021 7:05 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122648> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Guardian reports<https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/14/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court-stephen-breyer>:

The Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, said on Monday it was “highly unlikely” he would allow Joe Biden to fill a supreme court vacancy arising in 2024, the year of the next presidential election, if Republicans<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans> regained control of the chamber.

“I think it’s highly unlikely – in fact, no, I don’t think either party, if it were different from the president, would confirm a supreme court nominee in the middle of an election,” McConnell told Hugh Hewitt, a conservative radio host<https://hughhewitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/06-14hhs-mcconnell.mp3>.

McConnell blocked Barack Obama from filling a vacancy in 2016, denying Merrick Garland, now attorney general, even a hearing after he was nominated<https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/mar/16/obama-nominates-merrick-garland-supreme-court-dc-appeals-court-judge> to fill the seat vacated by the death of Antonin Scalia.

McConnell said that was because no new justice should be seated in an election year – a position he reversed with alacrity in 2020, on the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/18/ruth-bader-ginsburg-supreme-court-justice-dies-aged-87> two months before polling day.

Ginsburg, a liberal lion, was replaced by the conservative Amy Coney Barrett, tipping the court 6-3 to the right. Major cases are coming up on abortion rights, gun control, affirmative action and more.

The article quotes this tweet<https://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/1404451388856299525> of mine:
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122648&title=%E2%80%9CMcConnell%3A%20%E2%80%98Highly%20unlikely%E2%80%99%20I%20would%20let%20Biden%20fill%20supreme%20court%20seat%20in%202024%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Column: Why the Democrats’ voting rights bill will fail and what they can do about it”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122646>
Posted on June 15, 2021 7:01 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122646> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Doyle McManus LAT column<https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-06-13/why-democrats-voting-rights-bill-will-fail-and-what-they-can-do>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122646&title=%E2%80%9CColumn%3A%20Why%20the%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20voting%20rights%20bill%20will%20fail%20and%20what%20they%20can%20do%20about%20it%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Arizona: “People impersonating election officials are knocking on doors in Yavapai County, sheriff warns”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122644>
Posted on June 15, 2021 6:56 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122644> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Arizona:<https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2021/06/14/yavapai-county-sheriff-warns-imposters-asking-voting-history/7693805002/>

People are knocking on the doors of Yavapai County residents and asking how they voted in the last election, while falsely claiming to represent the county recorder’s office, sheriff’s office officials said.

The mysterious door-to-door survey, which has alarmed local officials, comes after the U.S. Department of Justice warned the Arizona Senate against plans to canvass voters’ homes as part of an unprecedented review of November’s election. Meanwhile, backers of the Senate’s audit have organized their own such door-to-door efforts.

Yavapai County Recorder Leslie Hoffman said she did not know if the people knocking on doors around Prescott are working on behalf of a political organization, but raised concerns that information residents provide could result in identity theft.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122644&title=Arizona%3A%20%E2%80%9CPeople%20impersonating%20election%20officials%20are%20knocking%20on%20doors%20in%20Yavapai%20County%2C%20sheriff%20warns%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Get Ready for the Shitstorm That Will Follow the Arizona ‘Recount'”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122642>
Posted on June 15, 2021 6:54 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122642> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Tim Miller<https://thebulwark.com/get-ready-for-the-shitstorm-that-will-follow-the-arizona-recount/> for The Bulwark:

Sometime soon the results of the Arizona audit will be brought forth. It seems quite likely, given the participants, that the auditor ninjas will claim that Donald Trump won Arizona. Or probably won Arizona—who can say! Or would have won Arizona, if not for those meddling kids.

And if this happens, the former president and his MAGA media echo chamber will once again stoke the flames of insurrection. Q-adherents will convince themselves that one of the seven seals has been revealed. Millions (tens of millions) of Republicans throughout the country will believe it. And some of them will demand action.

So when the Arizona audit bell tolls, what exactly is McConnell and McCarthy’s plan?

Because it sure looks as though they are dooming us all to repeat the same history we just lived through, humoring Trump’s delusions and hoping that none of their supporters die in their imaginary fight for freedom this time.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122642&title=%E2%80%9CGet%20Ready%20for%20the%20Shitstorm%20That%20Will%20Follow%20the%20Arizona%20%E2%80%98Recount%27%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>


“G.O.P. Bills Rattle Disabled Voters: ‘We Don’t Have a Voice Anymore’”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122640>
Posted on June 15, 2021 6:50 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122640> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/us/politics/disability-voting-rights.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage>

The Texas legislation<https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=87R&Bill=SB7>, which Democrats blocked<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/31/us/politics/texas-voting-bill.html> but Republicans plan to revive<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/31/us/politics/texas-voting-bill-.html> in a special session, is one of a series of Republican voting bills that would disproportionately affect people with disabilities. The Wisconsin Senate approved three last week with more to come, though unlike in Texas, the governor there is a Democrat and is expected to veto them. Georgia<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/us/politics/georgia-voting-law-republicans.html> and Florida<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/us/politics/florida-voting-rights-bill.html> have enacted similar measures.

For years, advocates have worked to mobilize Americans with disabilities — more than 38 million of whom are eligible to vote, according to researchers at Rutgers University<https://smlr.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/Centers/Program_Disability_Research/Disability_electorate_projections_2020.pdf> — into a voting bloc powerful enough to demand that politicians address their needs. Now, after an election in which mail-in voting helped them turn out in large numbers, the restrictive proposals are simultaneously threatening their rights and testing their nascent political influence.

“It’s only been the last few years that there have been studies done showing that if candidates would appeal to issues that the disability community cares about, there is such a thing as the disability vote,” said Bob Kafka, an organizer with Rev Up Texas, which aims to increase turnout among disabled Texans. “That’s why you’re seeing it playing out in Georgia and here and other places where the disability community is part of the larger fight against voter suppression.”

The fight also underscores the degree to which disability rights, once championed both by Democrats like former Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa and Republicans like former Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, have become one more partisan football, even though there are millions of disabled voters in both parties.

The most recent version of the Texas bill would ban drive-through voting, further limit absentee voting in a state that already has strict eligibility rules, and let poll watchers<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/01/us/politics/republican-pollwatchers.html> record video of voters as purported evidence of wrongdoing. Disability rights advocates worry that partisan poll watchers will misinterpret legal accommodations — like a worker helping a disabled voter complete a ballot, or a blind voter using a screen reader — as fraud.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122640&title=%E2%80%9CG.O.P.%20Bills%20Rattle%20Disabled%20Voters%3A%20%E2%80%98We%20Don%E2%80%99t%20Have%20a%20Voice%20Anymore%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D>
Posted in voters with disabilities<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=71>


Symposium on Ranked-Choice Voting<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122636>
Posted on June 15, 2021 5:23 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122636> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

The journal Politics and Governance has devoted its most recent issue to a series of empirical studies of RCV:

The Politics, Promise and Peril of Ranked Choice Voting (2021, Volume 9, Issue 2)
Edited by Caroline Tolbert
Complete issue: www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/issue/view/251<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_issue_view_251&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=DJZcR1d3fjYQbp10ynKHNijfLKnnJVLgLVdoO-lLTt4&e=>

Table of Contents:

Editor’s Introduction: The Promise and Peril of Ranked Choice Voting
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4385<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_4385&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=iLYb88_GGwgeH7Ke2iB0Vo-DkNRragh0SyQ9_-1Iuj8&e=>
By Caroline J. Tolbert and Daria Kuznetsova

Ranked Choice Voting in Australia and America: Do Voters Follow Party Cues?
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3889<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3889&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=MUmMZL1Q1ysaxJ12XIOse7mv9InpmDfQRDx5oCHin8k&e=>
By Benjamin Reilly

Using Campaign Communications to Analyze Civility in Ranked Choice Voting Elections
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4293<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_4293&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=hMW7cbKxD1v4HmthlGlWfLJH1cQ7CtsqpNzg23a_SJg&e=>
By Martha Kropf

Demographic Disparities Using Ranked-Choice Voting? Ranking Difficulty, Under-Voting, and the 2020 Democratic Primary
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3913<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3913&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=VwOCi-NzY6uoc01vhCB0EzPfrJjtGJBFkFI4_YFroeo&e=>
By Joseph A. Coll

The Impact of Input Rules and Ballot Options on Voting Error: An Experimental Analysis
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3938<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3938&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=ffagW2NI-1bRvzOVj7E1fMGYaknvCAFIEBOJC62g5Lk&e=>
By J. S. Maloy and Matthew Ward

Ranked Choice Voting and Youth Voter Turnout: The Roles of Campaign Civility and Candidate Contact
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3914<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3914&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=DnnRW2CZ_XOXtH3k_cUFVgUm2ub9d2vYquI2Qj5tuGg&e=>
By Courtney L. Juelich and Joseph A. Coll

Election Reform and Women’s Representation: Ranked Choice Voting in the U.S.
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3924<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3924&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=M_EdUKaFsD1ej2sEde1S21dlg9P6eR5kP1fUxhaBysw&e=>
By Cynthia Richie Terrell, Courtney Lamendola and Maura Reilly

Variants of Ranked-Choice Voting from a Strategic Perspective
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3955<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3955&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=2Szsisc7wriZ5FhpSidIoynD2OHZKO9vhh7N-1UC7uI&e=>
By Jack Santucci

Lessons from the Use of Ranked Choice Voting in American Presidential Primaries
www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/3960<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cogitatiopress.com_politicsandgovernance_article_view_3960&d=DwMBaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=N-bR9xDVr-BosXkpUZ6vesnGGMee8T0wvE92Tp2umjI&s=C4J56_LSbAKow4mLHUMCRGTC6uXQBK7DuBtoiDVKByg&e=>
By Rob Richie, Benjamin Oestericher, Deb Otis and Jeremy Seitz-Brown
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122636&title=Symposium%20on%20Ranked-Choice%20Voting>
Posted in alternative voting systems<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>


“Congress likely won’t take action on the growing threats to election integrity, leaving election workers vulnerable to criminal prosecution and results open to partisan tampering”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122634>
Posted on June 14, 2021 3:02 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122634> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Grace Panetta<https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-likely-wont-take-action-on-gop-election-subversion-2021-6> for Business Insider.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122634&title=%E2%80%9CCongress%20likely%20won%E2%80%99t%20take%20action%20on%20the%20growing%20threats%20to%20election%20integrity%2C%20leaving%20election%20workers%20vulnerable%20to%20criminal%20prosecution%20and%20results%20open%20to%20partisan%20tampering%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


June 16 Event: “Want Free and Fair Elections in the U.S.? It’s Not Just About Election Day”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122632>
Posted on June 14, 2021 2:45 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122632> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Details:<https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_SRQF0_2ATG6nbTQ0GsfYwQ>

Preventing election violence requires a holistic perspective, which includes mobilizing community leaders, utilizing law enforcement effectively, and structuring the election laws to discourage hyperpolarization. Join AfP on June 16th to hear from our panelists who will examine various initiatives that sought to prevent election violence in 2020 and discuss what more needs to be done moving forward.

Speakers

Larry Garber (Moderator), Independent Election Consultant and Senior Fellow, Alliance for Peacebuilding
Alexandra Chandler, Policy Advocate, Protect Democracy and Coordinator of the National Task Force on Election Crisis
Kevin Johnson, Executive Director, Election Reformers Network
Nathan Stock, Political Violence Mitigation Manager, The Carter Center
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122632&title=June%2016%20Event%3A%20%E2%80%9CWant%20Free%20and%20Fair%20Elections%20in%20the%20U.S.%3F%20It%E2%80%99s%20Not%20Just%20About%20Election%20Day%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Ensuring election integrity should not come at the cost of compromising voter access”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122630>
Posted on June 14, 2021 2:42 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122630> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Larry Garber and Avery Davis-Roberts in The Fulcrum.<https://thefulcrum.us/voting/carter-center>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122630&title=%E2%80%9CEnsuring%20election%20integrity%20should%20not%20come%20at%20the%20cost%20of%20compromising%20voter%20access%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Statutory Interpretation Case Decided Today<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122568>
Posted on June 14, 2021 11:04 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122568> by Anita Krishnakumar<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=16>

Today the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in Terry v. United States<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-5904/155041/20200928103337858_Cert%20FINAL.pdf>, interpreting the First Step Act.

Scotusblog commentary is here<https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/justices-reject-sentencing-reductions-for-some-crack-cocaine-offenders/> and begins as follows:

Justices reject sentencing reductions for some crack-cocaine offenders

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Monday that people convicted of certain low-level crack-cocaine offenses are not eligible for sentencing reductions under the First Step Act, a 2018 law that made some criminal-justice reforms retroactive. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion for the court in Terry v. United States.

In my view, the most interesting thing about the Court’s opinions is Justice Sotomayor’s lengthy footnote explaining that she refuses to join Part I (i.e., the facts and background section of the opinion!) because “it includes an unnecessary, incomplete, and sanitized history of the 100-to-1 ratio [for crack versus powder cocaine sentences].” The footnote is noteworthy both for its frank acknowledgment of the racial implications of the ratio and because of how rare it is for individual Justices to refuse to join Part I of a statutory interpretation opinion. Indeed, Justice Sotomayor’s refusal calls to mind another memorable Part I in a statutory interpretation case that two majority-opinion-joining Justices refused to sign onto: Justice Blackmun’s majority opinion in Flood v. Kuhn<https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/407/258/>, the baseball case that famously began with a Part I that was essentially an Ode to Baseball. Thomas’s Part I in Terry v. United States is no Ode to the 100-to-1 ratio, but it joins Justice Blackmun’s Part I in Flood as a rare example of a background section that offended sufficiently to prompt judicial distancing.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122568&title=Statutory%20Interpretation%20Case%20Decided%20Today>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


June 21 AEI Event: “How can we strengthen trust in the integrity of presidential elections?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122624>
Posted on June 14, 2021 7:17 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122624> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This looks important:<https://www.aei.org/events/how-can-we-strengthen-trust-in-the-integrity-of-presidential-elections/?mkt_tok=NDc1LVBCUS05NzEAAAF9qcvEl5CmSwIIj5OoN_hflukcy38x-ejnQ2Dwr2BEpnNPAPrA99Fh8NuobS_Zayy95ETokPdcucOx5W0lmNoxZDc9fyKdsqY9r9jTdr9TymtUFA>

Distrust of the results of presidential elections has been particularly intense in recent years. Many Democrats believed Donald Trump won the 2016 election through interference by Russian disinformation campaigns, and an even larger percentage of Republicans believe Democrats stole the 2020 presidential contest. This denial of election results is indisputably corrosive to the American political system’s long-term well-being.

Please join AEI’s Kevin R. Kosar and a panel of experts as they discuss various ways to strengthen the public’s trust in the results of our presidential elections.

LIVE Q&A: Submit questions to Elayne.Allen at aei.org<mailto:Elayne.Allen at aei.org> or on Twitter with #AEIElectionSecurity<http://www.twitter.com/hashtag/AEIElectionSecurity>.

Agenda

10:00 AM
Introduction:
Kevin R. Kosar, Resident Scholar, AEI

10:05 AM
Discussion

Panelists:
David Becker, Executive Director, Center for Election Innovation & Research
Daniel A. Cox, Resident Scholar, AEI
John C. Fortier, Resident Scholar, AEI
Justin Ryan Grimmer, Professor of Political Science, Stanford University
Kevin Johnson, Executive Director, Election Reformers Network

Moderator:
Kevin R. Kosar, Resident Scholar, AEI

11:00 AM
Q&A

11:30 AM
Adjournment
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122624&title=June%2021%20AEI%20Event%3A%20%E2%80%9CHow%20can%20we%20strengthen%20trust%20in%20the%20integrity%20of%20presidential%20elections%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“In Congress, Republicans Shrug at Warnings of Democracy in Peril”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122622>
Posted on June 14, 2021 6:54 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122622> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/us/politics/democracy-in-peril.html>:

Senator Christopher S. Murphy concedes that political rhetoric in the nation’s capital can sometimes stray into hysteria, but when it comes to the precarious state of American democracy, he insisted he was not exaggerating the nation’s tilt toward authoritarianism.

“Democrats are always at risk of being hyperbolic,” said Mr. Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut. “I don’t think there’s a risk when it comes to the current state of democratic norms.”

After the norm-shattering presidency of Donald J. Trump, the violence-inducing bombast over a stolen election, the pressuring of state vote counters, the Capitol riot<https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/12/us/capitol-mob-timeline.html> and the flood of voter curtailment laws<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/us/politics/democrats-republican-voting-rights.html> rapidly being enacted in Republican-run states, Washington has found itself in an anguished state.

Almost daily, Democrats warn that Republicans are pursuing racist, Jim Crow-inspired voter suppression efforts to disenfranchise tens of millions of citizens, mainly people of color, in a cynical effort to grab power. Metal detectors sit outside the House chamber to prevent lawmakers — particularly Republicans who have boasted of their intention to carry guns everywhere — from bringing weaponry to the floor. Democrats regard their Republican colleagues with suspicion, believing that some of them collaborated with the rioters on Jan. 6.

Republican lawmakers have systematically downplayed or dismissed the dangers, with some breezing over the attack<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/13/us/politics/republicans-capitol-riot.html> on the Capitol as a largely peaceful protest, and many saying the state voting law changes are to restore “integrity” to the process, even as they give credence to Mr. Trump’s false claims of rampant fraud in the 2020 election.

They shrug off Democrats’ warnings of grave danger as the overheated language of politics as usual.

“I haven’t understood for four or five years why we are so quick to spin into a place where part of the country is sure that we no longer have the strength to move forward, as we always have in the past,” said Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of Republican leadership, noting that the passions of Republican voters today match those of Democratic voters after Mr. Trump’s triumph. “Four years ago, there were people in the so-called resistance showing up in all of my offices every week, some of whom were chaining themselves to the door.”

For Democrats, the evidence of looming catastrophe mounts daily. Fourteen states, including politically competitive ones like Florida<https://www.nytimes.com/article/florida-voting-law.html> and Georgia<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/us/politics/georgia-voting-law-republicans.html>, have enacted 22 laws to curtail early and mail-in ballots, limit polling places and empower partisans to police polling, then oversee the vote tally. Others are likely to follow, including Texas<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/31/us/politics/texas-voting-bill.html>, with its huge share of House seats and electoral votes.

Because Republicans control the legislatures of many states where the 2020 census will force redistricting, the party is already in a strong position to erase the Democrats’ razor-thin majority in the House. Even moderate voting-law changes could bolster Republicans’ chances for the net gain of one vote they need to take back the Senate.

And in the nightmare outcome promulgated by some academics, Republicans have put themselves in a position to dictate the outcome of the 2024 presidential election if the voting is close in swing states.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122622&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Congress%2C%20Republicans%20Shrug%20at%20Warnings%20of%20Democracy%20in%20Peril%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


“Texas Dems amp up voting rights pressure with D.C. blitz”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122620>
Posted on June 14, 2021 6:41 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=122620> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Zach Montellaro<https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/14/texas-democrats-voting-rights-494281?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f109-dd93-ad7f-f90d0def0000&nlid=630318> for Politico.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D122620&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20Dems%20amp%20up%20voting%20rights%20pressure%20with%20D.C.%20blitz%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


--
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/20210615/1ae728c0/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/20210615/1ae728c0/attachment.png>