"Alaska's Senate race: Miller pushes on with
legal fight"
This
Alaska Dispatch report is detailed and interesting.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
08:03
PM
Justice Stevens' Comments on CU Focus on
Anti-Distortion Rationale
Following up on this
post, Lexis has now posted a transcript of the "60
Minutes" interview with Justice Stevens. Here is the relevant
exchange that I flagged earlier:
SCOTT PELLEY (voiceover): In Citizens United, the majority gave
corporations the right to spend as much as they want on
political campaigns; the majority said that limiting money in
politics is the same as limiting free speech.
Where does the court make a mistake in your view?
JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS: Well, you know, which mistake do I
want to emphasize?
(Justice John Paul Stevens laughing)
SCOTT PELLEY: You decide.
JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS: Well, you know, basically an election
is a debate. And most debates you have rules. And I think
Congress is the one that ought to make those rules. And if the
debate is distorted by having one side have so much greater
resources than the other that sometimes may distort the ability
to decide the debate on the merits. You-- you want to be sure
that-- that it's a fair fight.
The narrator, Scott Pelley, also made a statement about the case
that might lead Justice Alito to respond
"Not
true:": "The court majority overturned one hundred years of
law that limited corporate money in politics." Though the Tillman
Act dates back to 1907, that Act banned corporate
contributions.
The spending limit did not kick in until the 1940s.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
04:55
PM
"CAC Files Brief in Shelby County v. Holder,
Urges District Court to Uphold Voting Rights Act"
See this
post about this
amicus brief filed by the Constitutional Accountability
Center.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
04:47
PM
"To be certain, regardless of how the Court
ultimately decides the relatively narrow issue before it in
McComish, it will not mark the death of public financing."
That's the view
of the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21. I'm less optimistic.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
01:23
PM
"A SCOTUSblog milestone: Lyle's 2000th post"
Hearty congratulations to Lyle Denniston on this
impressive accomplishment. I always rely upon Lyle's
insightful analysis across the range of cases coming before the
Supreme Court. I am amazed at how well he masters the
intricacies of the Court's docket and clearly explains it to the
rest of us.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
01:20
PM
"Can Publicly Financed Elections Survive Without
Punishing Free Speech?"
The Institute for Justice has issued this press release, which
begins: "Today, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the
Institute for Justice's challenge to Arizona's "Clean Elections"
Act. According to Professor Rick Hasen, a prominent proponent of
publicly financed elections and publisher of a widely read and
highly respected blog on election law, the Court's decision to
hear the case spells doom for taxpayer financing of campaigns.
("An Effective End to Public Financing" by Rick Hasen, http://summaryjudgments.lls.edu/2010/11/it-is-with-great-pleasure.html.)
The reason, according to Hasen, is that the Court is likely to
strike down the "matching funds" provision of the system, under
which the state provides additional funds to participating
candidates when non-participating opponents and even independent
groups spend money on speech that opposes them. As Professor
Hasen puts it, rational politicians"will not opt into the public
financing plan unless they think they will be able to run a
competitive campaign under the public financing system. The
whole point of the extra matching funds in the Arizona plan is
to give candidates assurance they won't be vastly outspent in
their election." Professor Hasen raises an important point, but
if he is right, this is a reason to oppose public financing, not
to lament the fact that matching funds violate the First
Amendment."
Posted by Rick Hasen at
11:55
AM
Election Law Blog Chosen for "2010 ABA Blawg
100;" Vote Until Dec. 30 For Your Favorite Blog
I am gratified that the Election Law Blog has been chosen
by the ABA Journal in the "Niche" category for one of the top
100 law blogs in the country. If you like this blog, please
consider voting
for it by December 30 as the top of the "Niche" category.
Thanks for the testimonials from blog readers which got the ABA
to recognize this blog!
.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
11:45
AM
"The DeLay Conviction: Even the Post Doesn't Buy
It"
Brad Smith writes
at NRO.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
11:27
AM
"Supreme Court to decide constitutionality of
Arizona's public campaign finance law"
The Washington Post offers this
news update.
Posted by Rick Hasen at
09:01
AM