| Subject: Re: [EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 4/5/11 |
| From: Bill Maurer |
| Date: 4/5/2011, 9:08 AM |
| To: Rick Hasen <rhasen@law.uci.edu>, Election Law <election-law@mailman.lls.edu> |
Doug Kendall’s piece makes
an interesting point about how the influence of big money means that clean
elections is so necessary. And like the New Yorker piece from yesterday, it avoids
discussing a key bit of information that may shed some light on the merits of
that claim. Doug neglects to mention is that a number of legislators discussed
in the report as having received tickets from the Fiesta Bowl ran and were
elected as “clean” candidates. I guess that information doesn’t fit into the
Narrative, either.
Bill
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu
[mailto:election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu] On
Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 7:49
AM
To: Election Law
Subject: [EL] Electionlawblog news
and commentary 4/5/11
This
NY Times report begins:
"Until a few weeks ago, this state's election on Tuesday for a justice of
the Wisconsin Supreme Court was widely expected to be dull and
predictable."
Posted by Rick Hasen at 07:45 AM
Roll Call offers this report.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 07:41 AM
The
The Ohio Chief Justice wants to change
the rules for judicial selection.
ePollbooks
may come to
And there's controversy
over Brad Smth's possible appointment as dean of Case Western.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 07:35 AM
Doug
Kendall blogs.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 04:48 PM
Politico offers this report.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 03:01 PM
Eugene
Volokh has posted "The Freedom...Of
the Press"-- from 1791 to 1868 to Now -- Freedom for the Press as an
Industry, or the Press as a Technology? on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Both Justices and
scholars have long debated whether the "freedom ...of the press" was
historically understood as securing special constitutional rights for the
institutional press (newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters). This issue comes
up in many fields: campaign finance law, libel law, the newsgatherer’s
privilege, access to government facilities for newsgathering purposes, and
more. Most recently, last year's Citizens United v. FEC decision split 5-4 on
this very question, and not just in relation to corporate speech rights.
This article discusses what the "freedom of the press" has likely
meant with regard to this question, during (1) the decades surrounding the
ratification of the First Amendment, (2) the decades surrounding the
ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and (3) the modern First Amendment
era. The article focuses solely on the history, and leaves the First Amendment
theory questions to others. And, with regard to the history, it offers evidence
that the "freedom... of the press" has long been understood as
meaning freedom for all who used the printing press as technology -- and, by
extension, mass communication technology more broadly -- and has generally not
been limited to those who belonged to the institutional press as an industry.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 01:24 PM
Roll Call offers this
report.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 12:36 PM
David
Callahan has written this important
NYT oped.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 08:49 AM
--
Rick Hasen
Visiting Professor
UC Irvine
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen@law.uci.edu
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org