Friday, October 29, 2010
Charles White and Indiana disclaimer rules:
Charlie is the front-runner for the Indiana Secretary of State. He's the republican and is endorsed by the incumbent theodore "todd" rokita, who is running for congress.
The Dem has a strange name, Vop Ossily. Seems a nice guy, but he's way behind in the polls. "Nevertheless, White leads the race for Secretary of State 47 percent to 31 percent" - channel 8. I support Mike Wherry, the Libertarian, because getting 2% is how they keep their ballot status.
Anyway, Charlie's gotten some bad press lately, when it was found out he didn't really live in the city council district where he's been a citycouncilman,and has been voting somewhere he doesn't live.
Today's microscandal is that one of his staff left a disclaimer off a flyer.
Indystar article.
Once again, Democrats are trying to get criminal charges brought against Republican secretary of state candidate Charlie White. And once again, the Fishers man is saying he simply made a mistake.
This time, White's campaign mailed material promoting White but didn't disclose who paid for the mailings, which is required by law.
But of course it isn't required by law, since disclaimer statutes are unconstitutional per Talley and McIntyre, even after CU. An earlier version of Indiana's statute was found unconstitutional in my case Stewart v Taylor (1997),
but my lawsuit against the revised statute, Majors v Abell, was inconclusive. It did get a "dubitante" opinion from judge easterbrook. I haven't followed up with a new lawsuit yet.
My former senior partner, Dr. RJ Tavel, sent me the article. I wrote to Charlie's campaign and got a nice email back. I'd sent them a couple of recent amicus briefs I've written about how disclaimer statutes are unconstitutional. I also wrote to the Star reporter.
Maybe this is the time to mention it looks like the first circuit clerk rejected my amicus in NOM v McKee. There was a printing error and some of the pages weren't double spaced. Package came back but I haven't looked at it yet.
So I've written a brief explaining why Talley is still good law, but it's not considered filed yet.
If Charlie White gets elected, I'll be very interested to see his position on disclaimers. It's the election division that actually handles these, which is under the Secretary of State but is its own thing, with co-chairs appointed by the governor.
So White can't just give an order to stop enforcing the unconstitutional statutes, but he could make a strong suggestion.
White and I are on opposite sides of the voter ID controversy - today I once again was told I wouldn't be allowed to vote,and after some discussion cast a provisional ballot that probably won't be counted. But there may be other areas we can work together on.
Here's a pic of Manual Talley
Charlie is the front-runner for the Indiana Secretary of State. He's the republican and is endorsed by the incumbent theodore "todd" rokita, who is running for congress.
The Dem has a strange name, Vop Ossily. Seems a nice guy, but he's way behind in the polls. "Nevertheless, White leads the race for Secretary of State 47 percent to 31 percent" - channel 8. I support Mike Wherry, the Libertarian, because getting 2% is how they keep their ballot status.
Anyway, Charlie's gotten some bad press lately, when it was found out he didn't really live in the city council district where he's been a citycouncilman,and has been voting somewhere he doesn't live.
Today's microscandal is that one of his staff left a disclaimer off a flyer.
Indystar article.
Once again, Democrats are trying to get criminal charges brought against Republican secretary of state candidate Charlie White. And once again, the Fishers man is saying he simply made a mistake.
This time, White's campaign mailed material promoting White but didn't disclose who paid for the mailings, which is required by law.
But of course it isn't required by law, since disclaimer statutes are unconstitutional per Talley and McIntyre, even after CU. An earlier version of Indiana's statute was found unconstitutional in my case Stewart v Taylor (1997),
but my lawsuit against the revised statute, Majors v Abell, was inconclusive. It did get a "dubitante" opinion from judge easterbrook. I haven't followed up with a new lawsuit yet.
My former senior partner, Dr. RJ Tavel, sent me the article. I wrote to Charlie's campaign and got a nice email back. I'd sent them a couple of recent amicus briefs I've written about how disclaimer statutes are unconstitutional. I also wrote to the Star reporter.
Maybe this is the time to mention it looks like the first circuit clerk rejected my amicus in NOM v McKee. There was a printing error and some of the pages weren't double spaced. Package came back but I haven't looked at it yet.
So I've written a brief explaining why Talley is still good law, but it's not considered filed yet.
If Charlie White gets elected, I'll be very interested to see his position on disclaimers. It's the election division that actually handles these, which is under the Secretary of State but is its own thing, with co-chairs appointed by the governor.
So White can't just give an order to stop enforcing the unconstitutional statutes, but he could make a strong suggestion.
White and I are on opposite sides of the voter ID controversy - today I once again was told I wouldn't be allowed to vote,and after some discussion cast a provisional ballot that probably won't be counted. But there may be other areas we can work together on.
Here's a pic of Manual Talley
Comments:
Post a Comment
