The law of politics and the politics of law: election law, campaign finance, legislation, voting rights, initiatives, redistricting, and the Supreme Court nomination process
Rick Hasen's web log

"Courts asked to halt voter ID requirement for July 15"

The Atlanta Journal Constitution offers this report. I would think the chances that the courts would grant this injunction now are very small. The Supreme Court in Purcell v. Gonzalez cautioned against changing voter id rules (and related rules) just before an election, when it can cause great confusion.

Interesting Development in Eleventh Circuit VRA Section 2 Case

Almost a year ago, I blogged about a 2-1 decision of the Eleventh Circuit in Thompson v. Glades County Board of County Commissioners. I wrote that the case "raises fascinating issues regarding the meaning of majority-minority and influence districts post Georgia v. Ashcroft and Perry (the court does not acknowledge in its opinion that Congress repudiated the Supreme Court's opinion in Ga. v. Ashcroft (at least in the section 5 context) last summer in renewing the VRA), whether and how minority voter turnout should figure in determining if the Gingles' factors are met, and the appropriate standard of review by an appellate court of a district court decision to grant summary judgment in a section 2 case....I am not sure what the prospects are for rehearing this case en banc, but I would not be surprised to see this case end up in the Supreme Court., especially given Judge Tjoflat's dissent."

Now via How Appealing comes the news that the Eleventh Circuit sitting en banc has issued a brief order, which reads in full: "The judges of the en banc court are equally divided on the proper disposition of this case. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED by operation of law."

Next stop is likely the Supreme Court, where the case could well be a grant, vacate and remand in light of whatever it decides in next term's Bartlett v. Strickland.

July Preview

Looks like we're getting into July 4 quiet mode. Blogging will be light. I have been blogging less as I work on my draft Torts book for students (just completed the first half!), and then next Thursday I am off to Israel with the family until July 23. (If you happen to be in Jerusalem on July 17, I'll be giving a talk at Hebrew University on the U.S. presidential campaign finance system in transition.) Dan Tokaji, guest blogger extraordinaire, will be here to blog from July 10-23. I will have some email access but hope to take some time off before the very busy fall election season heats up again. So pardon me if there is a delay in responding to messages sent to me during July.

"Future of Clean Elections program in limbo"

Possible fallout from Davis v. FEC in New Jersey.

"Court orders change to German election law by 2011"

The court really cares about proportionality.

"McCain Allies Find Finance-Law Holes"

The Wall Street Journal offers this Page One report. In somewhat related news, the Politico offers RNC Creates Independent Expenditure Arm. Meanwhile, Sen. Obama has been doing some heavy fundraising of his own.

"Secretary of Veterans Affairs asked to grant elections officials access to veterans facilities"

See this press release, which begins: "In response to a federal directive prohibiting voter registration drives among veterans living at federally funded nursing homes, rehabilitation centers and shelters for homeless veterans, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, have written to Secretary of Veterans Affairs James B. Peake to request that Secretary Bysiewicz and elections officials be granted access to the facilities for the purposes of distributing voter registration materials and instructing residents on the use of newly-implemented voting machines."

AG Mukasey's Encouraging Remarks on Ballot Access and Voting Integrity

These remarks appear to be from a conference of DOJ attorneys who deal with election crime issues. Here is an important snippet:

Although, as I just said, ballot access and voting integrity are two sides of the same coin, that shouldn't prevent us from acknowledging that there is sometimes a tension between the two. Take voter identification laws, for example. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court adopted the Department's view that voter ID laws are not facially unconstitutional. As the Supreme Court held, in an opinion by Justice Stevens, such laws serve several compelling interests, including the interest in preventing voter fraud, and the interest in safeguarding public confidence in representative government.

At the same time, the Court acknowledged the undeniable fact that voter ID laws can burden some citizens' right to vote. It is important for states to implement and administer such laws in a way that minimizes that possibility. And it is important for the Department to do its part to guard against that possibility. We will not hesitate to use the tools available to us -- including the Voting Rights Act -- if these laws, important though they may be, are used improperly to deny the right to vote.

"High Court's Campaign Finance Ruling Poses Threat to State Laws"

CQ Politics offers this report. UPDATE: Here is Bob Bauer wearing his rose-colored glasses.

"Justice Department Says Criminal Prosecution for Knowing and Willful Campaign Finance Violations Will Be One of the 'Priorities' for Department, in Response to Democracy 21 Letter about 527 Groups"

See this press release which links to the DOJ and Democracy 21 letters.

Bauer and Hebert on SpeechNow

Is the lower court opinion lacking analytical rigor or a denial of request for extraordinary relief?

"Gerrymandering is the real threat to fair elections"

The Washington Post's David Broder has written this column.

Michigan Measure to Cut Legislative Pay, Change Legislative Redistricting"

AP says such a measure may qualify for the ballot. California tried a similar measure in the last decade, only to have the measure removed from the ballot on single subject grounds.

"Registration Bottlenecks: Will They Be a Problem in '08?"

Nathan Cemenska has this comment at Moritz.

Federal District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction in SpeechNow case

In an important ruling, a federal district court today denied SpeechNow's request for a preliminary injunction barring the FEC from enforcing the $5,000 individual contribution limit to its PAC. The ruling comes to the opposite conclusion on this issue as the Fourth Circuit in the recent North Carolina Right to Life v. Leake case, and the district court today relies upon Judge Michael's dissent in this case.

The SpeechNow case likely will be appealed to the D.C. Circuit, either now, or upon a final judgment on the merits, and I think it is likely that the Leake case or the SpeechNow case will be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court, which, given its recent skepticism of campaign finance regulation could well side with SpeechNow/N.C. Right to Life and against supporters of individual contribution limits for PACs.

A Democracy 21 press release is here. No word yet from the Center for Competitive Politics, which is litigating the SpeechNow case. Stay tuned. UPDATE: The CCP press release denouncing the decisionis here.

"Greg Abbott: Attorney general's office working hard to fight vote rigging"

See this Dallas Morning News oped.

"Senators Feinstein & Bennett Introduce Bipartisan Electronic Voting Reform Act "

See this press release.

"Obama's Money Class"

David Brooks has written this NY Times column.

"Lobbying Loophole Funds Conventions"

Jeanne Cummings has written this article for the Politico.

von Spakovsky on Millionaire's Amendment Case

Here, in the Weekly Standard.

Hellman, Pildes and Bauer on Campaign Finance, Money, Speech, and Incumbency Protection

Here, here, and here.

American Politics Research Special Issue on Election Administration and Voting Technology

This looks like it is full of interesting articles.

This is Getting Tiresome

Really.

Bruce Fein on Davis v. FEC, and Other SCOTUS Cases This Term

Here, in the Washington Times.

"Firm gets big cut of campaign donations; GOP candidates see little of funds raised; Some clients, donors unaware of numbers"

The Boston Globe offers this report.

Cristina Rodriguez Review of Landsberg VRA in Alabama Book

Here, forthcoming in the Yale Law Journal.

" Davis: Leveling rich candidates' speech unjustified"

Tony Mauro has written this article for the First Amendment Center.

"Obama's Fundraising Success May Herald a Whole New Model"

Norm Ornstein has written this Roll Call oped ($). See also this related National Journal column by Eliza Newlin Carney.

Roll Call on Questions Over How End of Millionaire's Amendment Will be Implemented

See here ($).

Debating the Latest California Redistricting Initiative

SacBee's Capitol Alert collects the links here (free registration). The measure will be known as Prop. 11.

"'527' groups keep low profile - so far this year"

McClatchy offers this report.

More Bauer on Alito on Davis

See here.

NY Sun (And Jim Bopp) on Davis's Implications for Lawsuit Against NYC Campaign Finance System

See here.

"Millionaires Win"

The Washington Post offers this editorial on Davis v. FEC, quoting this blog post of mine from Thursday.

Hayward, Ryan, and Tucker on Election Law Issues in Harvard Journal on Legislation

See here.

Lyle Denniston of Scotusblog on Davis v. FEC

See here. A snippet: "What Scalia denounced -- in a colorful dissent-- in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce in 1990, Alito has now led a majority to condemn in dispassionate terms in Davis v. Federal Election Commission. In Davis, the Court said in the clearest terms yet that it is unconstitutional for Congress to try to level the playing field in campaign finance."

"Utahn joins Federal Election Commission"

The Salt Lake Tribune offers this report, which begins: "Utah native Matt Petersen had a busy week: His wife, Wendy, gave birth to their third child, his son broke his arm, and, oh yeah, he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate to the Federal Election Commission."

"Justices for Free Speech"

The Wall Street Journal offers this editorial on Davis v. FEC.

"Priests barred from donations to candidates"

AP offers this report from Colorado.

Election Law in the NY Times

Linda Greenhouse, in likely one of her last articles for the NY Times, analyzes the Supreme Court term just ending, including the voter id case. See also this summary, which lists election law cases of the Court's term.

The newspaper also offers this profile of Bob Barr's libertarian presidential campaign, and the possibility it could tilt Georgia and some other red states to Sen. Obama.

The paper also editorializes against the Davis v. FEC decision.

More Davis v. FEC Links

Rick Pildes (follow up to his earlier post)

Jim Bopp (currently top item on page)

David Keating (Club for Growth) (and here and here)

Kos

Keith Olbermann

George Will

News and Roundup on Davis v. FEC

Most of the MSM attention yesterday was lavished on yesterday's Heller decision involving the Second Amendment. Only Adam Winkler saw an election law connection, analogizing Heller to Bush v. Gore. Adam's more substantive post on Heller is here. Congratulations to Adam and fellow election law list member Eugene Volokh whose scholarship was cited in yesterday's Heller opinions.

My analysis of Davis v. FEC (not FEC v. Davis, as I wrote yesterday) is here. The end of that post had links to a number of other sources, including some newspaper stories that have since been updated. Here are the stories and commentaries appearing by this morning:

New York Times

Washington Post

Los Angeles Times (The end of the article notes that Sen. Obama was one of the first to take advantage of the amendment in his U.S. Senate race)

USA Today

NPR

NY Sun (and see this oped by John Samples and Ilya Shapiro)

The Hill

The Louisville Courier-Journal (on the Kentucky Senate race featuring Sen. McConnell against a wealthy opponent) (Here's some Rick Pildes anti-incumbency fodder from the article: "Though McConnell opposed the overall bill, he was one of the co-sponsors of the 'millionaire's amendment'for Senate races. And he voted for the amendment on the Senate floor. In a statement, McConnell said he was merely doing his job as the bill's Republican floor manager by backing a GOP amendment.")

Wall Street Journal

BNA (which notes that most reform groups downplayed the importance of the case)

Sen Feingold (who downplays the importance of the case)

Bob Bauer (who excoriates Stevens' dissent but calls Alito's majority opinion "no masterpiece")

Michael Shrimpf and Sean Parnell at the Center for Competitive Politics blog

And Jim Bopp issued a very interesting press release that I will link to once it is web-posted.

"Revitalized FEC To Confront Big Agenda, But Action On McCain Question Unlikely"

National Journal's Congress Daily offers this report.