<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Saturday, June 24, 2017

http://www.journalnow.com/opinion/columnists/bob-hall-no-common-sense-in-voter-id-law/article_a98a8490-484a-5d51-8999-96ebba7e1b76.html

Friday, June 23, 2017

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2017/06/22/mr-president-meet-avner-shapiro-saboteur-from-the-doj-swamp/

J Christian Adams, bomb-throwing.

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448765/hillary-clinton-wisconsin-voter-suppression-claim-dubious-excuse-flawed-campaign

The usual from Hans.

I am at a CLE on Indiana Legislative Update.
There was some discussion of Reed v Town of Gilbert.
I tthink of the case mainly about a landmark standard of review case,
requiring strict scrutiny for content-based censorship.
But their focus is on the exact fact pattern of Gilbert - political signs.
So there's some new indiana statute that restricts the ways towns can
restrict political signs. It sounds problematic but possibly constitutional, but I'll ned to look at the statute.

It seems to me I could rely on Reed v Gilbert to revisit the issues in Majors v Abell, where Posner said more guidance was needed.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Handel wins runoff 53%. As expected; that was a safe GOP seat, but it was close enough to be worth challenging.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gops-karen-handel-beats-democrat-jon-ossoff-in-georgia-house-race-1498011241 I -think- this link is not paywalled.
Hasen's prayers answered; it is outside the margin of litigation, and probably not thge result of fraud or vote buying. I don't know whether the holding of the election moots the case about the re-opening of voter registration for the run-off. That is, I dont think it moots the issues, but I doubt the parties will continue to litigate, but they might.

from my inbox;

Hello from St. Louis Public Radio!

Just a quick note to make sure you saw politics editor Erica Hunzinger's extensive reporting on the implementation of Missouri's new voter ID law. Your questions helped drive her quest to get some real answers about exactly how voter ID will work when it goes into effect on July 1. Have a look at her story here, as well as an interactive checklist designed to send people in the right direction to make sure they can vote. 

As always, we appreciate you taking the time to ask questions and encourage you to keep sending Curious Louis your queries

We're also launching a voting round of questions about voter ID that didn't quite fit into this story so keep a look out for that later this week. 

Thanks again for participating!

Kimberly

Engagement Producer
St. Louis Public Radio | 90.7 KWMU

Monday, June 19, 2017

http://ballot-access.org/2017/06/16/did-ballot-access-laws-that-barred-evan-mcmullin-from-the-ballot-in-some-states-alter-the-winner-of-the-2016-presidential-election/

http://www.zdnet.com/article/security-lapse-exposes-198-million-united-states-voter-records/

Saturday, June 17, 2017

http://www.newsday.com/opinion/commentary/pence-has-a-history-with-voter-fraud-1.13742553

Thursday, June 15, 2017

http://getinvolved.runforoffice.org/volunteer/?recruiter_id=969659

group is collecting info on how to run for school board, all across the country.

http://nationbuilder.com/course_how_to_run_for_office/?recruiter_id=969659

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

http://www.ktts.com/news/local-news/ashcroft-gratified-with-todays-voter-id-ruling

That's terrible journalism. It basically reprints a government press release with no other viewpoint nd no factchecking. We don't know what the court did or didnt do. Quite likely, it scheduled  hearing for a temporary injunction. That's the usual way these things go. But who knows, the article doesn't say.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/on_the_front_lines/federal_court_affirms_ban_on_peaceful_protests_on_supreme_court_plaza_refus

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-06-13/russian-breach-of-39-states-threatens-future-u-s-elections

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Disclaimer issue in tight San Antonio run-off

https://www.courthousenews.com/san-antonio-mayoral-runoff-turns-toward-nasty/

The issue here was not that fliers must have a disclaimer; that's already been found unconstitutional in Doe v Texas. The claim is that the fliers falsely stated the name of the group that published them,
strong texas values.
 It took a turn toward nasty this week when a direct-mail hit piece against Nirenberg purported to be from a group that apparently does not exist, operating out of a P.O. box near the San Antonio airport.
The supposed source of the mailer, Strong Texas Values, is not registered with the City Clerk’s Office or the Texas Ethics Commission, according to local news reports. Falsifying the origin of an injurious political mailer is a Class A misdemeanor in Texas, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine. 
I think the statute either doesn't apply here, or runs into constitutional problems. But I don't know all the facts, aand I havent looked closely at the statute.
OK, here's more on the flier and the controvery:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Mayoral-runoff-gets-even-dirtier-with-release-of-11192786.php
They did not allow my comment:
"Your article suggests thaat fliers are required to state their author. But that statute was found unconstitution back in 2003. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1686198/doe-v-state/. Freedom of speech to say what you want in a political flier is one of our strong texas values. - Robbin Stewart."
Meanwhile,

Nirenberg defeats Taylor by large margin.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Nirenberg-defeats-Taylor-by-large-margin-11211208.php
Sec. 255.004. TRUE SOURCE OF COMMUNICATION. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to injure a candidate or influence the result of an election, the person enters into a contract or other agreement to print, publish, or broadcast political advertising that purports to emanate from a source other than its true source.
(b) A person commits an offense if, with intent to injure a candidate or influence the result of an election, the person knowingly represents in a campaign communication that the communication emanates from a source other than its true source.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 899, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.
This comes a few sections later in the election code than the disclaimer statute struck down in Doe. I think this statute would have to be construed narrowly, or run into the constitutional problems of Doe.
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1686198/doe-v-state/

Saturday, June 10, 2017



ACORN Flawed Business Model Apparently Reappears in Indiana Voter Registration Effort


http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93044

I agree that it's  a flawed business model to have quotas for registration, but the business model was foisted on acorn by some states that made it illegal to pay per registrati
 on. I don't recall whether Indiana is one of those. My roommate was working at this group, for $15/hr, and got caught up on some of his back rent before the story hit and they shut down. He's been working lately  as a volunteer at the county HQ, is behind on his rent again, and I'm evictting him. It's been a strange bedfellows situation; he doesn't understand how I can be a Republican or why I wanted to vote for Trump in the primary, where they didnt let me vote.

http://thehill.com/latino/336667-puerto-rico-goes-to-the-polls-for-statehood

McCain deathpool
http://basementbanter.com/senatorial-deadpool-update-john-mccain-looks-upset-victory/

Wednesday, June 07, 2017

Some Kentucky libertarians won their challenge to a campaign finance rule that named the gop and democrats specifically.
winger via hasen:
http://ballot-access.org/2017/06/06/u-s-district-court-strikes-down-kentucky-campaign-finance-law-that-let-individuals-give-more-money-to-democratic-and-republican-parties-than-other-parties/

http://ballot-access.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Schickel-Win-6-6-17.pdf

from the opinion: Gables v. Patton, 142 F.3d 940, 945 (6th Cir. 1998).
I'm pretty sure that's Gable v Patton, not Gables. Gable was wrongly decided and upheld an unconstitutional disclaimer statute. Kentucky has a long history of upholding unconstitutional disclaimer statutes; what I call the Kentucky exception to the First Amendment.

The court applied strict scrutiny on speech claims, intermediate on finance claims; that seems right.

Equal protection challenges to election finance restrictions under the Fourteenth Amendment must survive “exacting scrutiny.” Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 44-45 (1976). “The restriction can be sustained only if it furthers a vital governmental interest that is achieved by a means that does not unfairly or unnecessarily          
 Case: 2:15-cv-00155-WOB-JGW Doc #: 122 Filed: 06/06/17 Page: 8 of 35 - Page ID#: 4627 9 
burden either a minority party's or an individual candidate's equally important interest in the continued availability of political opportunity.” Id. at 94 

That's a third definition of execting scrutiny that I havent noticed before. "Exacting" scrutiny can by lax, as in elsewhere in Valeo, or strict, as in McIntyre. This seems a bit more in between, but leaning toward strict. I may need to re-read the 100 page Valeo opinion again, in order to be able to use this passage when courts use Valeo as an anything goes standard.

These are off the cuff remarks while I am driving through Wisconsin with not enough sleep; I may  or may not revise this later.



Tuesday, June 06, 2017

https://vettingroom.org/2017/06/06/professor-amy-coney-barrett-nominee-to-the-u-s-court-of-appeals-for-the-seventh-circuit/ via howard.

https://www.theet.com/news/free/city-of-clarksburg-wants-bankruptcy-judge-to-allow-demolition-of/article_9ddd67fe-8cb2-5a68-9cff-806c4ca65a1b.html

http://www.newspressnow.com/opinion/editorials/voter-id-is-now-the-law/article_5babaa7e-4d45-5ca5-aab6-1806163ed296.html

I probably won't get around to writing a rebuttal.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/state_news/voter-id-law-promoted-by-missouri-secretary-of-state-jay/article_38eb250c-49fa-11e7-a3cb-8329e5caf4a8.html

Provisional ballots will be counted if the signature provided matches the one the state has on file or if the voter returns with documentation.

This might be enough to make it hoold up in court, if it actually works out that way in practice.
I wonder if Jay ccould convince Indiana to adopt such an alternative.

United States v Reality Winner. Has a ring to it.

http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92968

Monday, June 05, 2017

word for the day: hen·di·a·dys
henˈdīədəs/
noun
RHETORIC
  1. the expression of a single idea by two words connected with “and,” e.g., nice and warm, when one could be used to modify the other, as in nicely warm.

‘Necessary and Proper’ and ‘Cruel and Unusual’: Hendiadys in the Constitution” (Virginia Law Review 2016), new conspirator sam bray.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/05/sam-bray-joining-our-merry-band/?utm_term=.c800d2f4e128

New Report Says Thousands of PA Voters (Including 17K in Philly) Registered on Time But Could Not Vote Because of Administrative Delays

If this pans out, it could be a big deal.
And this does not look like voter suppression–more like bureaucratic incompetence.
Is there liability here? Is negligence enough?

WILMINGTON, N.C. (AP) - Former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory is urging state lawmakers to pass a new voter ID law because he said he knows “a lot of noncitizens” voted last fall.
The News & Observer of Raleigh reports (http://bit.ly/2qNPqOF ) McCrory urged GOP legislators Saturday at the state Republican Party convention to pass a law limited to requiring voters to show identification.
The U.S. Supreme Court last month ruled against reinstating North Carolina’s voter ID law, which also changed ballot registration and early voting requirements.
The State Board of Elections found 41 noncitizens cast ballots last year. They were legal residents who were registered to vote, meaning an ID requirement likely wouldn’t have stopped them.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/4/former-nc-gov-urges-gop-to-pass-new-law-requiring-/

Thursday, June 01, 2017

odds are the court won't choose to hear this disclaimer case.

The petitions of the day are:
16-1140
Issue: Whether the free speech clause or the free exercise clause of the First Amendment prohibits California from compelling licensed pro-life centers to post information on how to obtain a state-funded abortion and from compelling unlicensed pro-life centers to disseminate a disclaimer to clients on site and in any print and digital advertising.

I got asked today to write an op ed on voter ID, so that's now item 74 on my to do list, and this post is a note to myself to get to work on it.

This wasn't what I meant to paste into this post. But I'll put it up anyway.

To: Mark Duncan
Center Township Constable
Julia Carson Center
300 E Fall Creek Pkwy N Dr #130

From: Robbin Stewart
gtbear@gmail.com. 5/31/17

I am writing concerning an event that took place today in the courtroom of the Center Township Small Claims Court.

I was present in the building for the purpose of filing a small claim. It was my first time in the building; my previous visits to marion county small claims were at the city-county building location.
Court was in session, so I stopped in to observe proceedings, while filling out my small claim.

I was approached by a bailiff, who told me that I could not be there, and ordered me to leave the courtroom. I reminded him that courts are open under Indiana law, and as a member of the public I had a right to be there. He was adamant that I must leave, so I left. His attitude was hostile, rude, authoritarian, and menacing. I went to the clerk’s window, and explained the problem. I was directed to speak to a senior clerk, who at first told me there was nothing she could do. I asked who was in charge and was given your name.
I sat on the floor in the hallway to fill out my paperwork. The clerk who took my filing was helpful and professional, kudos to her.

Later, this same senor clerk told me that she had spoken to the judge, that I did have a right to be in the courtroom, that the bailiff was new. The bailiff was present but did not speak to me.

Because the problem was promptly resolved, I do not think it will necessary for me to file a notice of tort claim.

Let me identify some of the legal issues involved.

When I was unwillingly ejected from the courtroom, my rights under the open courts provision of the Indiana constitution were violated.

My right to due course of law under Article I section 12 was violated.

When a person is ejected, under color of law, from a place she has a right to be, this constitutes a seizure, both under Article I section 11, and the Fourth Amendment.
Consequently, an action under 42 USC 1983 would be in order.

I am a person who has previously won a case against the county, Stewart v Taylor, which came out of my race for Township Board, so I have an interest in trying to correct problems when the township or county is violating the rights of citizens. Please train and supervise the bailiff so that this sort of incident does not recur. I would appreciate receiving a written letter from the bailiff – either to gtbear@gmail.com, or P O Box 29164, so that I can see that they understand what they did wrong and how it isn’t going to happen again. If I receive a satisfactory letter, that will conclude the matter.



Wednesday, May 31, 2017

https://publicinterestlegal.org/blog/alien-invasion-ii-sequel-discovery-cover-non-citizen-registration-voting-virginia/

J Christian Adams group claims 1700 illegal aliens voted in Virginia.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Glaring error by the New York Times in its attack on North Carolina Republicans:

NY Times:
In Washington, efforts by this state’s Republicans to cement their political dominance have taken a drubbing this month. On May 15, the Supreme Court struck down a North Carolina elections law that a federal appeals court said had been designed “with almost surgical precision” to depress black voter turnout. A week later, the court threw out ....
Of course the Court did not strike down the North Carolina election statute; it took no action in that case, other than to deny cert.

The Chief Justice spelled this out in his statement regarding the denial.

"Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that “[t]he denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case.” United States v. Carver, 260 U. S. 482, 490 (1923)."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-833_7l48.pdf

Will we see a correction?

I also take issue with the New York Times stylebook using "law" to describe a statute that's been found unconstitutional, void, and not a law, under Marbury Madison, but I lost that war a long time ago.

Otherwise, this is a fine story and good reporting by the Times and Michael Wines.



Sunday, May 28, 2017

http://www.caller.com/story/news/columnists/nick-jimenez/2017/05/27/jimenez-fixes-texas-voter-id-part-problem/348761001/

Saturday, May 27, 2017

http://blackhatconservative.com/federal-prosecutor-working-voter-fraud-found-dead/

He had joined the office in January. Court records show he had been handling several visa and passport fraud cases not too mention the DNC voter fraud case in which “volunteers” were caught shredding republican absentee ballots. Coincedentaly, his body was found in Debbie Wassermann Schultz’s district.

http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20170526/voter-id-laws-deserve-day-in-supreme-court-susan-shelley

http://www.wral.com/editorial-disguising-voter-suppression-behind-mask-of-voter-id/16724460/

Thursday, May 25, 2017

The texas house bill amending the struck down voter ID scheme has an affidavit option, but imposes substantial penalties for false statements on the affidavit.

My question is, does this violate the 24th Amendment?

In the earlier litigation the appeals court reversed the trial court's finding of a 24th A violation, and the supreme court has not addressed the issue since 1966, aside from a mention in Justice Ginsberg's dissent from denial of a stay.

Under the court of appeals' standard, whatever exactly that is, does the chilling effect of prosecution for using an affidavit create an obstacle to voting, as did the poll tax waiver reciept in Harmon v Forssenius?

There are of course other constitutional concerns under the first and 14th Amendments, but I think it raises the 24th A question. That's all I have time for right now.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

http://pilotonline.com/news/nation-world/national/judge-allows-recall-vote-over-post-trump-victory-resolution/article_128781e8-578f-5034-b8cd-2b2cfbd52889.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/05/23/school-board-member-sues-citizens-who-tried-to-recall-him-but-botched-the-process-loses-years-later-has-to-pay-defendants-attorney-fees/?utm_term=.86c913852767

Two lawsuits about recall elections.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/05/24/prepare-for-the-weirdest-election-day-in-history-after-a-candidate-allegedly-body-slams-a-reporter/?utm_term=.5975e42a7833

Monday, May 22, 2017

I have no opinion yet on today's 5-3 decision on North Carolina redistricting, Cooper v Harris.

But it's always a good time to keep in mind Cooper v Aaron. That was a case fromm the 1950s, or was it 1960? (1958, same year as Alabama v NAACP) that held, so much for "all deliberate speed"; the southern states needed ot get witt the program and implement the desegregation ordered by Brown v Board. It was an assertion of power by the judical branch over the legislative and executive, and an assertion of federal power over the states. During the Trump admistration whether 4 years, or less, or 8 years, these tensions will be at issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Aaron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Harris

North Carolina's 12th district was the subject of Shaw v. Reno509 U.S. 630 (1993), Hunt v. Cromartie526U.S. 541 (1999), and Easley v. Cromartie532 U.S. 234 (2001).
I remember Shaw v Reno, but I have not kept track of the more recent cases; redistricting  and gerrymandering just isn't an issue I follow closely.

Today's decision was a win for Rev. Barber, the charismatic and confrontational leader of the N Car. NAACP who I have worked with slightly in his Moral Mondays program. The attemp to get an Indiana chapter going seems to have fizzled, or maybe I've just fallen out of touch.

Friday, May 19, 2017

I wonder if felon disenfranchisement raises 19th amendment issues? it's mostly males who are felons, probably enhanced among blacks. can the 15th and 19th and maybe 14th be chained together?

https://thinkprogress.org/gop-anti-abortion-playbook-voting-rights-aa0ccac3304e


The GOP is running its anti-abortion playbook against voting rights — and it’s working

Want to know what the future of voting rights looks like? Look at how the GOP went after abortion.


post deleted, mistakenly posted to wrong blog.

https://communityimpact.com/houston/katy/at-the-capitol/2017/05/19/state-voter-id-changes-come-amid-federal-rulings/

The piece of House legislation presented was authored by Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, and mirrors the legislation passed in the Senate by Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, earlier in the session.

I suggest we call it the 2017 PhilKing Voter ID Act.

(terminology note: according to my stylebook, it's an Act or  bill and if passed a statute, but not a "law" until constititutional issues are resolved. Some people are comfortable using the term "law" to refer to a void unconstitutional statute; I'm not.)

Filking, see Filk Music: Filk music is a musical culture, genre, and community tied to science fiction/fantasy/horror fandom and a type of fan labor. The genre has been active since the early 1950s, and played primarily since the mid-1970s.



Wednesday, May 17, 2017

5 Winter v. Wolnitzek, 186 F.3d 673, 693 (E.D. Ky. 2016)

A case to read, if I can ever get around to it.

http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020160516884/WINTER%20v.%20WOLNITZEK

Having just briefly skimmed it, I endorse his nomination to the 6th circuit. When I ran for judge, I encountered many of these restrictions on speech by judicial candidates. Mn GOP v White was supposed to have settled much of this.
here is the letter opposing him.
http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/Thapar%20MIP%20Opposition%20Letter%205%2017%2017.pdf

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/15/can-the-anti-trump-resistance-take-philadelphias-da-office/

I don't know if an independent can win in philly, but it's worth a shot.
ah, apparently he's not running as an independent but in today's primary.
with 11%, Krasner has a strong lead.

Friday, May 12, 2017

http://explorepahistory.com/displayimage.php?imgId=1-2-10FC



http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/anne-arundel/ph-ac-cn-fbi-raid-0512-20170511-story.html
FBI raids office of Republican campaign consultant in Annapolis

WaPo:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/fbi-searches-republican-political-consulting-firm-in-annapolis/2017/05/11/43949a9e-367a-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html?utm_term=.af3a999dba65

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/6alzm0/fbi_confirms_activity_in_annapolis/dhfnm85/?sh=8bd62816&st=J2KZA1Y9

FBI may be investigating russian money laundering to trump campaign via internet fundraising and a bunch of small gop ad brokers.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/05/12/trump-warns-sacked-fbi-chief-comey-not-leak-conversations

Trump warns sacked FBI chief Comey not to 'leak' conversations.

Because what we need right now is more Watergate references.
In the old days, it was said that J Edgar Hoover's FBI could take out any politican that stood in his way. Deep Throat was Mark Feltz, #3 at the FBI. I don't know if the FBI will take an active role in investigating Trump, and whether firing Comey made that better or worse for Trump.

Note how "Repub,ican" is in the headlines, which it should be, but contrast with
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/politics/corrine-brown-guilty.html

Ex-Florida Congresswoman Convicted of Taking Money Meant for Charity.

Paragraph 7 finally gets around to mentioning that she's a Democrat. She intends to seek a new trial, and I express no opinion about whether she's guilty, legally or morally.
update: the instapundit made this same point yesterday.  https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/264708/

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/anne-arundel/ph-ac-cn-fbi-raid-0512-20170511-story.html


https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/6alzm0/fbi_confirms_activity_in_annapolis/dhfnm85/?sh=8bd62816&st=J2KZA1Y9

FBI may be investigating russian money laundering to trump campaign via internet fundraising and a bunch of small gop ad brokers.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

http://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/politics/news/a9555/what-joe-biden-is-doing-now/

note to self: send a resume to the Biden center at U of Del.

When Roosevelt appointed Joe Kennedy to head the new Securities and Exchange Commission, he said "It takes a thief to catch a thief." Now Trump has appointed Kobach to look for voter fraud.
Kobach's rise to power reminds me a bit of the doctor in Urula LeGuin's The Lathe of Heaven.
Kobach somehow became a law professor at my alma mater UMKC. He then parleyed that into a race for Kansas Secstate. he then got the legislature to give him prosecution powers so he could chase voter fraud. He was on Trump's transition team, I think. Now he has a national pulpit. We'll see what he does with it.

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92456

placeholder for a post on eisenhower and the 26th amendment.

Nebraska Lawmakers Kill Voter ID Amendment Proposal

for now anyway. 
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/nebraska/articles/2017-05-09/nebraska-lawmakers-kill-voter-id-amendment-proposal

Friday, May 05, 2017

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/05/branstad-signs-controversial-voter-id-bill-into-law/311568001/ (link plays annoying music)

"Iowa voters soon will need to show identification at the polls under a new law signed Friday by Gov. Terry Branstad. 
The measure overhauls Iowa's election laws through a series of changes that Republicans say are needed to ensure the integrity of the process and to prevent fraud, but which Democrats and others argue will suppress votes by creating barriers for the poor, elderly, people with disabilities and minorities. "


So Iowa passed that voter ID bill, so what are the details, and who is suing?


I do not know whether thebill, now act, is constitutional in its details.

Kansas court upholds grandfather clause on rational basis review.

Next up, literacy tests, poll taxes, lynching?

I forget the name of the 1915 grandfather clause case. Guinn v United States?
I don't think it was US v Classic (1940).
The Texas voter ID litigation seems like a continuation of the white primary cases,
Nixon v Herndon, Nixon v Condon, etc. I'm a little rusty on that history.
Yes, Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347 (1915).

It seemed odd the court made no mention of Guinn.

http://dailybruin.com/2017/05/03/usac-election-board-sanctions-bruins-united-independent-candidates/

Not sure yet where the daily bruin is. I'm guesssing a California public college, which would make its internet regulations unconstitutional - both state and federal.

University of California Los Angelos.



Thursday, May 04, 2017

I wondered what the indiana law blog would have to say on the early voting lawsuit, but it turns out it shut down last week. This might be a bluff to get more funding, but for now it's gone. But it lives on as a twitter account.
https://twitter.com/indianalawblog?lang=en

All the cool blogs have moved to twitter.

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

I heard a rumour that Indiana Common Cause filed suit against Marion County for not having more than 1 early voting location. details may follow.

http://www.commoncause.org/about/staff-directory/julia-vaughn.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

it was suggested to me that i contact julia re my voter ID issues, which is a good tip.

ah here we go

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/02/naacp-common-cause-target-early-voting-marion-county/101170598/

edit: of course hasen already covered this earlier today. i am in a news vacuum while at work so ,u blogging is  a bit off.

http://www.peacock-panache.com/2017/05/lawsuit-marion-early-voting-30990.html

I see this lawsuit as a bit of a long shot.



With votes still waiting to be counted supporters of the sugary-drink tax have conceded the election in what is turning out to be a lopsided defeat.
The city ballot measure would have levied a two-cents-per-ounce tax on distributors of sugary drinks; revenue from the tax would have expanded early childhood education in the city.
Early unofficial results, around 9:30 p.m., from the city clerk show 63% voted against the ballot measure, while 37% voted for it.
The New Mexican will soon have district-by-district voting data, as well as expanded coverage of the decision, on its homepage, santafenewmexican.com.
The vote brings to an end a brief but hotly contested special-election campaign that drew millions in out-of-state donations and a spotlight to Santa Fe, the latest progressive outpost to consider such an initiative.
But unlike Philadelphia, Berkeley, Calif., and others, Santa Fe turned it down, suggesting resistance to what opponents said was a regressive and unfair tax, targeting lower-income families.
Opponents of the proposed tax argued it would discourage the purchase of sugary drinks and thus imperil the revenue source for the proposed prekindergarten expansion.
This story is developing. Check santafenewmexican.com for more.

Tuesday, May 02, 2017

It was election day in Carmel Indiana today. A referendum, probably to riase school taxes. It's an off year for most elections, and I didnt realize this one was happening, but someone caame into work with an "I voted" sticker.

Yup, school tax hike. Hamilton County is a rich suburb north of Indy.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/hamilton-county/2017/05/02/3-hamilton-county-school-districts-pass-referendums/101195884/

If I'd known this was happpening I might have been able to organize some opposition, or at least monitor the polls for irregularies.

Friday, April 28, 2017


Menendez donor, Florida Man, found guilty on all counts; may be pressured to testify.

Thursday, April 27, 2017

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/wag-dog-tv-series-works-at-hbo-998140

possible wag the dog tv series. de niro attached,

Monday, April 24, 2017

Centrist Macron leads Le Pen to runoff May 7th in France. Septo de Mayo?

Meanwhile Trump puts a 20% tax on the Canadian lumber he will use to build a wall on the Canadian border, and

 Theresa May become the most powerful leader in Europe.

Sunday, April 23, 2017

http://www.omaha.com/opinion/the-public-pulse-getting-an-id-isn-t-an-inexpensive/article_08396bde-261a-11e7-b4ec-4347886fc2f8.html

http://www.shanghaidaily.com/world/Voting-begins-in-French-presidential-election/shdaily.shtml

http://www.millenniumpost.in/delhi/voters-brave-heat-only-to-find-names-missing-238219 (india).

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Disclosure kills department:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/04/19/can-the-police-retaliate-against-a-citizen-for-refusing-to-answer-police-questions/?utm_term=.fbc7770f77da

Orin Kerr at Volokh musing about whether a motorist actually has a right to remain silent.

The FEC voted 2-3, I assume, to deny a continued exemption to disclosure for the socialist worker's party. 4 votes are needed to do anything, and merely continuing the exemption counts as doing something.
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=92168

The best response would be for Trump to appoint a socialist worker's party representative to Ann Ravel's open seat on the FEC, but this won't occur to anyone, and I don't know if it's politically feasible.

Meanwhile, the SW could probably win in court, if they could afford a lawyer. My plate is probably too full to assist.

Leftist 3rd parties, including the Greens, hurt the D's, so the D's tend to make their lives unpleasant with ballot access hurdles and chilling disclosure regimes. That photo of Stein with Putin is highly significant. I can't recall if I posted that here yet.

The GOP members of the commish voted, probably not out of partisanship, but because as they correctly point out, there's no compelling interest in the finances of this tiny legacy party. Unless somebody can show they are cashing checks from the Kremlin, or something like that.

https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/855092552529326080

adding stein-putin photo






Wednesday, April 19, 2017

http://www.wibc.com/news/local-news/federal-voter-id-law-indianas-messer-proposes-it-democrats-object

Hoosier congresscritter proposes national voter ID law.

The GA special election  for congress will go to a run-off, where the GOP holds a slight edge.
The Dem got 49%, just under the 50% needed to avoid a run-off. No 3rd party candidate as far as I know. 1 Dem and a dozen GOP dwarves. D's spent 6+ million, gop 3 million, if what I heard is right.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Brexit.
Trump.
The Dutch election.

Next, France.
Now, Prime Minister May has called for elections. Her conservative party currently holds a 15 seat lead. She hopes to expand this to up to 100 seats and gain a personal mandate.
It is likely that Labour will lose seats and the whoevers, the 3rd party, liberal democrats will gain from their current 9 seats.
 I'm unclear if the Scottish National Party is still a thing; I assume they function as an anti-Brexit faction. I don't think the Greens have any seats right now.



                                            This may not be the May I'm looking for.



http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/georgia-house-special-election-district-6

Monday, April 17, 2017

https://heatst.com/politics/former-fec-chairwoman-calls-for-regulations-of-political-speech-on-the-internet/

A lot in the news lately about Trump's tax returns.

I don't think anybody's noticed yet, but what's really at stake is abortion rights.
There's no freestanding right to an abortion as such.
What there is is a right to privacy, which includes the doctor-patient relationship.
Roe v Wade, as written, was not so much about the rights of women, as it wwas about the rights of doctors. The court felt that abortion bans intruded on the doctor patient relationship and the right to privacy.

 The skirmishes over Trump's tax returns involve his right to privacy. Under the 16th Amendment, the government gets some special powers to compel speech, in order to make the income tax workable.
But that is speech to the government, not to the public at large.

Generally, no one has a "public right to know" someone else's tax returns. That can change when litigation makes such records public records, but such testimony is often under seal.
I'm not awarre of of any lawsuit involving trump's tax returns where the evidence would be more probative than prejudicial, or where a seal order wouldn't be reasonable.

There are a host of problems with the various schemes to try to compel Trump to reveal his tax records. There's an ex post facto problem, a bill of attainder issue, etc. There's a matter of executive privilege. There's the Term Limits v Thorton issue that one can't restrict ballot access by adding qualifications for president or congress.
There's a first amendment problem when speech is regulated for its content; courts tend to apply strict scrutiny and judge such statutes harshly.
This comes into play in the compelled speech cases such as Wooley v Maynard, Barnette v W. Va Board of Education, Riley v Federation of the Blind, Tornillo v Miami Herald, Talley v California, McIntyre v Ohio, Watchtower v Stratton.If we have one right in this country, it's the right to remain silent.

 The core issue is his right to privacy. I used to know, via an online mailing list, a guy named Walker Chandler. In Chandler v Miller, the supreme court said that Georgia couldn't make Chandler take a drug test to get on the ballot. Doing so would violate his constitutional right of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.
Anatole France one said something along the lines of in America, the rich as well as the poor have the right to sleep under bridges.

Here, President Trump is more likely than the average guy to win a case about his right to privacy over his tax returns. First, because he's the president, and can bill his legal defense to the taxpayers, and second, because he's Trump, a man who can afford to keep whole law firms busy.

Maybe that's the real game plan here - to set up a collusive lawsuit Trump will win, to make a point about the right to privacy, which underlies a woman's right to choose. But I don't think anybdy's playing the game that many moves ahead. It's just a matter of strange bedfellows.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

http://www.omaha.com/opinion/the-public-pulse-requiring-an-id-to-vote-is-just/article_6d6776b4-2164-11e7-a7cd-f777da76a6fc.html

Friday, April 14, 2017



Thursday, April 13, 2017

A proposed solution for Guam voting rights:

Allow Hawaii to annex Guam, Amercan Samoa, Saipan, any other pacific ocean US territory I may be forgetting. This would require that congress, the state of hawaii, and the territory in question to all agree. Guam would become a county, of Hawaii, just like Maui is now, so it would gain a right to vote in presidential elections, but lose its observer in congress, if it has one of those.
A bill in congress that allowed but did not require this solution could ease some of the current sore feelings fromt he continuing impact of the Insular Cases. I am not clear why the issue of Guam is currently before the 7th circuit, which mostly deals with Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.
So far I've never been to Guam. I used to work with some American Samoans, and was impressed.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

article at demos, linked by hasen, discusses state right to free and equal elections.

http://www.demos.org/blog/4/11/17/enter-justice-gorsuch-what-now-campaign-finance-reform

If I get more time I may add some thoughts. At least 30 states have a free and equal elections clause. In some states it's "free and open". A few states, such as Missouri and Colorado, have important decisions under the clause, while there are other states like Delaware that have no reported cases.
I wrote on this topic in my 1994 thesis at UMKC.

I'm a Gorsuch fan. But for the many who are not, this is a good time to get to know your state constitution, what's in it, how and why to litigate under it, how to add to it with amendments or legislation.

Justice Brennan was a champion of the  state constitutional approach, as he saw federal retrenchment under Reagan-Bush. He came from the New Jersey high court, which has always had a strong independent civil rights tradition. On the West Coast, Hans Linde was another advocate of rights under state constitutions. Unfortunately, the Brennan Center shares only the name, not the philosophy.

http://www.latimes.com/visuals/video/84139175-157.html

LA city council to vote to infringe right to keep arms in the home.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/french-election-fears-return-to-rattle-bonds-euro-2017-04-11

France nervous about upcoming election. Kenya too, for other reasons.

At my new temporary job I sit in front of a computer all day and I'm not supposed to use the internet for my usual news junky stuff; it's frustrating.

Chief Justice Roberts is already the swing vote, sometimes.

In Crawford, he and Kennedy joined Steven's narrow holding that plaintiff's facial challenge failed on the facts they gave. I disagree with that position but it was far better than Scalia's concurrence.

In the Obamacare case, he boldly reasserted limits to the commerce clause, but then upheld the statute under the taxing power. That's a politically nuanced position that may have set up the Trump win.

Courtwatchers could point to more eamples.

Saturday, April 08, 2017

I am currently, temporarily, employed, and it's a high security facility, so I didnt know till today that the filibuster is gone, Gorsuch was confirmed, and it all played out like Trump said it would a week ago. As 'Pope-elect', he starts hearing cases net week. A triumph for the federalist society.
He might not be another Scalia, but he's a strong addition to the court, and will let the Roberts court go in some new directions.

Friday, April 07, 2017

http://hppr.org/post/feds-order-kobach-reveal-documents-he-showed-trump

Monday, April 03, 2017

http://www.inforum.com/news/4245078-bismarck-attorney-brings-lawsuit-8th-circuit-court-appeals

gorsuch passes out of committee on party line vote.

filibuster likely.

http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-on-power-20170320-story.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/03/identity-theft-racial-justice

lisa s davis had voting problems. another lisa s davis had her same birthday. this probably happens a lot. well written article.

Seal or no seal?
Was white house offcial's tweet against Amash a Hatch Act violation?
We don't know, but the tweet has reposted to no longer show the presidential seal.



Saturday, April 01, 2017

http://freebeacon.com/issues/anti-gorsuch-liberal-groups-fails-disclose-donors/

dark money against gorsuch.

http://www.npr.org/2017/03/22/521083950/inside-the-wealthy-family-that-has-been-funding-steve-bannon-s-plan-for-years

same info as was in the new yorker article, but audio option.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/02/politics/donald-trump-north-korea/

Trump: US will act unilaterally on North Korea if necessary


http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/326929-senators-fear-fallout-of-nuclear-option

Senators fear fallout of nuclear option


http://www.conservativehq.com/article/25396-100-days-trump-senate-gop-and-nuclear-option-it%E2%80%99s-pay-me-now-or-pay-me-later

100 Days of Trump: For Senate GOP and the nuclear option, it’s pay me now or pay me later


with trump in the white house, could we please stop calling it the nuclear option?



Thursday, March 30, 2017

http://associatesmind.com/new-start-here/ site with commentary on the legal profession.

Disclosure kills department:
Hasen has an article at politico discussing how democrats in control of state legislatures could pass bills to make Trump disclose his tax returns as a condition of ballot access.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/donald-trump-tax-returns-release-214950

He admits that such a plan would be of dubious constitutionality, citing Term Limits v Thornton
(states can't add extra qualification for congress) but contrasts with Bush v Gore (states have wide authority to run their elections so Bush wins.) Such a plan would also have political risks of GOP retalation. 

Will solidly Republican states allow electors to vote only for Republican candidates for president? If the tax gambit is OK, then such a law might also be constitutional.

It is possible that I'm missing the tone of the piece and this is all just satire or wild speculation. But in Walker Chandler v Miller, the court held that it would be a 4th Amendment violation to piss-test GA state legislative candidates. 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-126.ZS.html
This would seem controlling. 

The column also assumes that the Democratic controlled states would be willing to pass something rather obviouly unconstitutional, and would face no consequences for doing so.
Unfortunately, he's probably right, and this is not limited to just one side of the aisle.

I think that a GOP state allowing only GOP votes for president would also be obviously unconstitutional, maybe on 1st Amendment or 14th Amendment grounds. I'm not sure which case controls. 

If somebody wants to see Trump's tax returns, the way to go about is by warrant or possibly subpoena. That would involve some allegation of criminal or civil liability where his financial records wwould be more probative than predjudicial. The way things are going, that could happen. US v Nixon, about the release of watergate tapes, might be the case on point. 

   I don't think it is only democrats in congress who will have issues with the way Trump is governing. Today he attacked the freedom caucus, for defeating the health care bill. That's a group whose support he urgently needs to support his budget. I still have an open mind about Trump. Clown, or crazy like a fox? He's great for the news cycle. NYT subscriptions are up, and CNN is raking in cash. I enjoy a good floorshow.






This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?