[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/8/21

[Rick Hasen]

“Georgia Senate considers repealing no excuse absentee voting in sweeping election bill”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121110>
Posted on March 8, 2021 8:47 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121110> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CNN<https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/08/politics/georgia-senate-no-excuse-absentee-voting/index.html>:

Georgia Republican lawmakers are pushing to clamp down on voting rights Monday, potentially passing a sweeping election bill that among other things would repeal no-excuse absentee voting.

Under SB 241<https://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/60009>, voters would need to be 65 years old or older, absent from their precinct, observing a religious holiday, be required to provide constant care for someone with a physical disability, or required to work “for the protection of the health, life, or safety of the public during the entire time the polls are open,” or be an overseas or military voter to qualify for an absentee ballot. The bill aims to undo a 2005 Republican-backed law allowing no-excuse absentee voting.

The bill comes as Georgia has become ground zero for election law changes in the wake of the 2020 election. Republicans in the state, citing baseless allegations of voter fraud pushed by former President Donald Trump<https://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/president-donald-trump-45> and other GOP officials, have moved to roll back access to mail-in voting and early voting<https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/republican-election-commission-voting-bills-2021/index.html>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121110&title=%E2%80%9CGeorgia%20Senate%20considers%20repealing%20no%20excuse%20absentee%20voting%20in%20sweeping%20election%20bill%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>


ELJ Roundtable Rescheduled<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121108>
Posted on March 8, 2021 8:40 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121108> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Election Law Journal roundtable scheduled for March 9<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121035> will be rescheduled. Stay tuned for an update.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121108&title=ELJ%20Roundtable%20Rescheduled>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


Supreme Court, Without Comment, Rejects Final Trump Election Cert. Petition<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121106>
Posted on March 8, 2021 6:35 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121106> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Order list.<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030821zor_8n59.pdf>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121106&title=Supreme%20Court%2C%20Without%20Comment%2C%20Rejects%20Final%20Trump%20Election%20Cert.%20Petition>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“In Georgia, Republicans Take Aim at Role of Black Churches in Elections”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121104>
Posted on March 7, 2021 4:06 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121104> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/06/us/politics/churches-black-voters-georgia.html> article, with the subhead: “New proposals by the G.O.P.-controlled Legislature have targeted Sunday voting, part of a raft of measures that could reduce the impact of Black voters in the state.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121104&title=%E2%80%9CIn%20Georgia%2C%20Republicans%20Take%20Aim%20at%20Role%20of%20Black%20Churches%20in%20Elections%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


“Will Democrats scrap the filibuster to pass big election package?”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121102>
Posted on March 7, 2021 4:00 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121102> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Dan Balz<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/will-democrats-scrap-the-filibuster-to-pass-big-election-reform-package/2021/03/06/f04052dc-7e11-11eb-85cd-9b7fa90c8873_story.html> for WaPo:

Ben Ginsberg, a Republican election-law attorney who called out Trump’s falsehoods about the election being stolen, said that in any bill this big, there are good provisions and questionable ones. “It’s an almost 800-page bill, so while there is some fine stuff in there, significant other parts read like a bill hijacked by the wily political operatives in the Democratic Party. . . . It’s a huge gift to the Republicans because two weeks ago the story was GOP civil war and now, lo and behold, they’re unified.”

The debate in Congress over the For the People Act is set against the backdrop of action by Republican legislators in states to make voting more difficult. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has pushed for the federal legislation, about 250 bills to restrict voting have been introduced or pre-filed in 43 states, a roughly sevenfold increase over a year ago. Many of these state-level bills would tighten rules for mail-in ballots or require more restrictive voter identification provisions.

“Democrats and Republicans have very different views on how to run elections, on how easy it should be to vote,” said Nate Persily, a professor at Stanford Law School, an expert on election laws and procedures, and an advocate for H.R. 1. “They have diametrically opposed views on how elections should be financed and how districts should be drawn. There is very little middle ground here. If Democrats had 60 votes in Senate, it would be a different battle, but it is their last chance to make some of these changes in time for the 2024 election.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121102&title=%E2%80%9CWill%20Democrats%20scrap%20the%20filibuster%20to%20pass%20big%20election%20package%3F%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Trump sends cease-and-desist letter to GOP organizations to stop fundraising off his name”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121100>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:57 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121100> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/06/trump-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-gop-organizations-stop-fundraising-off-his-name/>

Former president Donald Trump has sent a cease-and-desist letter to at least three Republican organizations demanding they stop using his name and likeness to fundraise, two Trump advisers confirmed Saturday.

The letter, which was first reported by Politico<https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/03/06/scoop-trump-sends-legal-notice-to-gop-to-stop-using-his-name-492021>, was sent to the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Representatives for the three groups did not immediately respond to requests for comment or for copies of the letter Saturday.

I understand why Trump wants to get a bigger piece of money raised using his name, but I question whether the enforceability of such a requirement would violate the First Amendment.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121100&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%20sends%20cease-and-desist%20letter%20to%20GOP%20organizations%20to%20stop%20fundraising%20off%20his%20name%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Two Paterson City Council Members Indicted on Voter Fraud Charges in Council Race”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121098>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:53 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121098> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NBC New York:<https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/two-paterson-city-council-members-indicted-on-voter-fraud-charges-in-council-race/2923088/>

Two city council members in Paterson have been indicted for allegedly interfering with a special election last year, Attorney General Gurbir Grewal announced Wednesday, in a case cited by then-President Donald Trump in his unsuccessful lawsuit to try and invalidate voting by mail in New Jersey.

Alex Mendez won the special election to fill a council seat on May 12, but voter fraud claims soon surfaced. The state attorney general’s office initiated a probe after U.S. Postal Service inspectors said they found hundreds of mail-in ballots located in a mailbox in Paterson, along with more found in nearby Haledon.

Ultimately, the Passaic County Board of Elections decided not to count 800 ballots cast in the race and a judge ordered a new election for last November.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121098&title=%E2%80%9CTwo%20Paterson%20City%20Council%20Members%20Indicted%20on%20Voter%20Fraud%20Charges%20in%20Council%20Race%E2%80%9D>
Posted in absentee ballots<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Biden Signs Order Meant to Make Voting Easier”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121096>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:44 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121096> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NYT:<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/07/us/politics/biden-executive-order-voting.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage>

President Biden is signed an executive order on Sunday that directed the government to take steps to make voting easier, marking the 56th anniversary of the Bloody Sunday march<https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1965/03/08/101532955.html?pageNumber=1> in Selma, Ala., which swiftly turned voting rights into a national cause.

The multipart order is aimed at using the far-flung reach of federal agencies to help people register to vote and to encourage Americans to go to the polls on Election Day. In a speech for the Martin and Coretta King Unity Breakfast on Sunday, Mr. Biden argued that such actions were still necessary despite the progress of the last half-century.

“The legacy of the march in Selma is that while nothing can stop a free people from exercising their most sacred power as citizens, there are those who will do everything they can to take that power away,” Mr. Biden said.

“Every eligible voter should be able to vote and have it counted,” he said. “If you have the best ideas, you have nothing to hide. Let more people vote.”

The president’s actions come in the wake of his predecessor’s monthslong assault on the voting process<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/10/us/politics/voting-fraud.html> during the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 riot that erupted at the U.S. Capitol after that predecessor, Donald J. Trump, repeatedly sought to overturn the election results<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/31/us/trump-election-lie.html>.

The executive order is relatively limited in scope. It calls upon officials at federal agencies to study and potentially expand access to voter registration materials, especially for those with disabilities, incarcerated people and other historically underserved groups.

It also orders a modernization of the federally run Vote.gov website to ensure that it provides the most up-to-date information about voting and elections.

But the order does not directly address efforts by many Republican-led state legislatures to restrict voting, including measures that would roll back the mail voting established in many states during the pandemic.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121096&title=%E2%80%9CBiden%20Signs%20Order%20Meant%20to%20Make%20Voting%20Easier%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“How Republicans misunderstand the 2020 turnout story”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121094>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:35 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121094> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Harry Enten<https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/07/politics/voter-turnout-analysis/index.html> for CNN:

Numerous Republican state legislatures are trying to pass new voter restriction legislation<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/27/us/republican-voter-suppression.html> (e.g. limiting absentee and early voting). Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress are trying to pass laws<https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/03/politics/house-democrats-hr1-vote/index.html> that expand access to the ballot box.

The moves from both camps come after an election with record turnout <https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/politics/turnout-2020-record-voting/index.html> in which there were multiple false charges of fraud<https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/03/politics/fact-check-pence-election-hr1-democrats-elections/index.html> by prominent Republicans like former President Donald Trump<https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/11/21/harry-enten-analysis-michigan-voters-trump-no-proof-cpt-vpx.cnn&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1614983620063000&usg=AOvVaw2N0oQhogJjKants8hVq0Av>.

But we should be clear: high turnout had little to do with why Trump ended up being a one-term president. Trump lost because he was an unusually unpopular president, and he likely would have been defeated if turnout looked like it did in 2016.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121094&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Republicans%20misunderstand%20the%202020%20turnout%20story%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“The Supreme Court Might Kill Voting Rights—Quietly”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121091>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:26 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121091> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

David Gans for The Atlantic<https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/the-supreme-court-might-kill-voting-rightsquietly/618220/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121091&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Supreme%20Court%20Might%20Kill%20Voting%20Rights%E2%80%94Quietly%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>


“Taking names: Dem Rep. Lofgren catalogs GOP colleagues’ election claims with a view toward discipline”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121089>
Posted on March 7, 2021 3:24 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121089> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NBC News:<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/taking-names-democratic-rep-lofgren-catalogues-gop-colleagues-election-claims-n1259742>

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., has released a detailed examination of the social media accounts of Republican House members who voted to overturn the 2020 election results to analyze what role they might have played in inciting the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/feds-charge-over-200-capitol-riot-we-ve-learned-lot-n1256799> on Jan. 6.

“Like former President [Donald] Trump, any elected member of Congress who aided and abetted the insurrection or incited the attack seriously threatened our democratic government,” Lofgren wrote in the prologue to her 1,939 page “social media review.”<https://lofgren.house.gov/socialreview>

“They would have betrayed their oath of office and would be implicated in the same constitutional provision cited in the article of impeachment” against Trump following the Capitol riot, she continued….

The report looked at posts between Nov. 3, 2020, and Jan. 31, 2021, “relevant to assessing the potential of Congress’ constitutional prerogatives and responsibilities, including actions pursuant to the 14th Amendment and/or House rules,” she wrote.

The document lists members in alphabetical order by state and focuses on posts that either cast doubt on the election results or implored people to “fight” for Trump.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121089&title=%E2%80%9CTaking%20names%3A%20Dem%20Rep.%20Lofgren%20catalogs%20GOP%20colleagues%E2%80%99%20election%20claims%20with%20a%20view%20toward%20discipline%E2%80%9D>
Posted in chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Mail Ballots Not a Clear Boost for Turnout or Biden”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121085>
Posted on March 5, 2021 8:24 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121085> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WSJ:<https://www.wsj.com/articles/mail-ballots-not-a-clear-boost-for-turnout-or-biden-11614940202?mod=e2tw>

DID MAIL-IN VOTING BOOST BIDEN? The presidential-election results left the impression that mail-in voting increased turnout and propelled President Biden to victory<https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-wins-2020-presidential-election-ap-says-11604766914?mod=article_inline>. But the reality is that voting by mail didn’t do either, Stanford researchers say in a new paper based on the latest data<https://siepr.stanford.edu/research/publications/how-did-absentee-voting-affect-2020-us-election>. That finding is notable because mail-in voting has become a controversial topic as many state legislatures debate restricting its use in future elections.

But much of the debate around voting by mail misunderstands the actual impact of the policy, according to the paper. In states where voting by mail was a new option, many voters used it. Turnout was high in 2020, but it didn’t increase significantly more in states that expanded voting by mail versus other states, the researchers found.

“I think both sides are massively overestimating the effect that vote by mail has on participation,” said Andrew Hall, one of the paper’s authors, though it could affect unusually close races, like the presidential race in Georgia. For example: In Texas, 65-year-olds turned out at nearly the same rate as 64-year-olds, “even though 65-year-olds voted absentee at much higher rates than 64-year-olds because they could do so without having to provide an excuse,” according to the paper.

Some political scientists differ on how to read the results. Emory University’s Alan Abramowitz concludes that the “dramatic increase” in 2020 absentee voting contributed to increased turnout<https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/assessing-the-impact-of-absentee-voting-on-turnout-and-democratic-vote-margin-in-2020/>, but he agrees that “increased absentee voting did not favor Joe Biden’s candidacy.” Republicans in more than 30 state legislatures have proposed legislation to put new restrictions on absentee voting this year, with some moving toward passage quickly in swing states like Georgia<https://www.wsj.com/articles/fight-over-voting-access-revs-up-in-georgia-11612780203?mod=article_inline>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121085&title=%E2%80%9CMail%20Ballots%20Not%20a%20Clear%20Boost%20for%20Turnout%20or%20Biden%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Georgia Republicans Want to Reshape Voting Law, Burdening Voters of Color”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121083>
Posted on March 5, 2021 7:26 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=121083> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CPI and Georgia Public Broadcasting report<https://publicintegrity.org/politics/elections/ballotboxbarriers/georgia-voting-republicans-reshape-laws-voters-of-color/>.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D121083&title=%E2%80%9CGeorgia%20Republicans%20Want%20to%20Reshape%20Voting%20Law%2C%20Burdening%20Voters%20of%20Color%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>



--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210308/151a5e32/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/20210308/151a5e32/attachment.png>