Subject: Re: [EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 2/4/11 -- "Opposition" to VRA
From: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry@pepperdine.edu>
Date: 2/4/2011, 9:26 AM
To: Election Law

Opposition to continuance of the current geographically selective preclearance provisions is not a general opposition the VRA, which certainly is and has been incredibly important to the ability of ethnic minorities to have effective voting rights. I think perhaps the geographic scope and perhaps the general scope of the preclearance provisions should be updated or reconsidered, but that does not make me an opponent of the VRA. In the same post in which Rick quotes himself referring to "opponents of the Voting Rights Act," he also links to an article from the Anniston Star newspaper which includes the following paragraph:
 
"Laws do sometimes fail DOJ pre-clearance. In a suit currently in federal court, Anniston City Councilman Ben Little is asking Alabama to enforce a law requiring judges to recuse themselves when a case involves a lawyer who is also a large donor to the judge’s campaign. That law has been on the books for 15 years but has not been enforced due to lack of pre-clearance."
 
There may be more to the story than meets the eye, but does anyone think that laws dealing with judicial recusal for conflicts of interest are likely to have a substantial linkage to voting rights? Wouldn't it make more sense to allow challenges to such laws if they have discriminatory intent or effect rather than to require preclearance? Or perhaps to allow "as applied" challenges to the recusal requirement where a case involves voting rights?
 
Mark Scarberry
Pepperdine
 
 
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu [election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen [hasenr@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 8:18 AM
To: Election Law
Subject: [EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 2/4/11

February 04, 2011

"Health Care and the Voting Rights Act"

I've written this new Opinion column for Politico. It begins:

    With news coverage focused on Federal District Judge Roger Vinson's decision Monday to declare the health care reform law unconstitutional, it might be easy to miss this week's news from another federal courthouse: opponents of the Voting Rights Act have renewed their efforts to have that law declared unconstitutional, too.

    As different as these cases look, the Voting Rights Act litigation may well save the health care law--or most of it -- from being declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 08:14 AM

David Gans Observations About Shelby County Oral Argument

Here.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 08:07 AM

"Voting Rights Act mandates review of state law banning paycheck deduction for union dues"

News from Alabama.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 08:04 AM

February 03, 2011

"Census Estimates Show Big Gains for US Minorities"

AP offers this report.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 05:15 PM

"Redistricting amendment allies sue Fla. Gov. Scott"

AP offers this report on an attempt to force the state to seek preclearance of the redistricting initiatives which passed last fall.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 04:49 PM

A Slightly Bigger Ask

The FEC announces a $2,500 individual contribution limit for the next federal cycle.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 02:28 PM

"The Rise of Do-It-Yourself Redistricting"

Stateline.org offers this report. See also this press release from Azavea, George Mason University and Harvard University.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 01:37 PM

"Domicile, Rahm-icile: Reflections on the Elections Stained Glass Window"

That's Doug Chapin's "Director's Note" in this week's Electionline Weekly.

Posted by Rick Hasen at 01:29 PM
--
Rick Hasen
Visiting Professor
UC Irvine School of Law
rhasen@law.uci.edu

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