Electionlawblog news and commentary 6/10/06

"Lawsuit raises ballot access question"

See this news from Illinois about a case pending before the 7th Circuit.

"Suffolk Jury Looks Into Issue of Dual Voting by Second-Home Owners"

The NY Times offers this report, which begins: "A Suffolk County grand jury subpoenaed election records for Saltaire on Fire Island yesterday after complaints that some summer residents had voted illegally by casting ballots there and in the communities where they live most of the year, county officials said. Prosecutors declined to comment. But critics of the village government have accused several people of dual voting, including Geraldine A. Ferraro, the former Democratic vice presidential nominee, and her husband, John A. Zaccaro Sr."

"Officials expect voter ID requirement to complicate fall election"

AP offers this report from Ohio.

"Gov. Is the Judge: Janavs Back to the Bench"

Following up on this post, the LA Times offers this article.

"More on Florida's Registration Rules"

Dan Tokaji has this interesting post. A snippet: "The appearance of partisan bias is fueled by another law that the Florida legislature passed and Governor Jeb Bush just signed, as noted in the Miami Herald. (Thanks to Nate Persily for the pointer.)"

The Democrats' Complaint Against Replacing DeLay's Name on the Ballot in Texas

Here.

When Are Those Campaign Finance and Redistricting Cases Coming from the Supreme Court?

The indispensable Lyle Denniston has this post, explaining what faces the Supreme Court as it ends its term. In a nutshell, the Court will likely have to issue 24 sets of opinions (in 32 cases, some of them, like the redistricting and campaign finance cases, consolidated cases) over what appears to be three-five decision days. I see the days as 6/12, 6/19, and 6/26 (all Mondays), and possibly 6/15 and 6/22 (in the past, the Court has added decision days on Thursdays at the end of the term). Additional days could be added if the court does not complete its opinions by 6/26. Lyle reports that "At the moment, there appears little likelihood that any of the cases will be put over for reargument in the next Term."

Measure T Passes In Humboldt County; Legal Challenge is Coming

See here. Measure T bars non-local corporate spending in ballot measure campaigns. Here is earlier useful coverage from the Los Angeles Times.

Selective Congressional Testimony on RenewtheVRA website

A great place to get an understanding of the case for renewing the VRA in its current form is from the Renew the VRA website, run by the LCCR. I can understand why they choose to link only to favorable news stories and editorials. But to me it is a bit misleading that their page gathering congressional testimony links only to testimony that they find favorable (without any notation that these are selective pieces of congressional testimony). For example, compare this and this (Profs. Gaddie and Pildes don't appear on the RenewtheVRA version of the testimony).

-- 
Rick Hasen
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA  90015-1211
(213)736-1466
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org