Have a Comment?
E-Mail Me at rhasen-AT-law.uci.edu
Election Law Blogger
Rick Hasen (posts)
Guest Bloggers
Heather Gerken (posts)
Justin Levitt (posts)
Nate Persily (posts)
Rick Pildes (posts)
Dan Tokaji (posts)Generously Supported By
ELB Feeds and Email Subscriptions
RSS XML
Get ELB Delivered by E-Mail to Your In-box via Feedburner
Books by Rick
The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown (Yale University Press, coming summer 2012)
The Voting Wars Website
Book tour information
Preorder from
Amazon
Barnes and Noble
NEW! Order the e-Chapter sneak preview for reading now:
The Fraudulent Fraud Squad: Understanding the Battle Over Voter ID: A Sneak Preview from "The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown
The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore (NYU Press 2003) NOW IN PAPER
Book introduction
Table of Contents
Order from Amazon.com
Order from BarnesandNoble.com
Journal of Legislation Symposium on book
The Glannon Guide to Torts: Learning Torts Through Multiple-Choice Questions and Analysis (Aspen Publishers 2d ed. 2011)
Election Law--Cases and Materials (4th edition 2008) (with Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Daniel P. Tokaji
Remedies: Examples & Explanations (Aspen Publishers, 2d ed. 2010)Election Law Resources
Election Law--Cases and Materials (4th edition 2008) (with Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Daniel P. Tokaji)
Election Law Journal
Election Law Listserv homepage
Election Law Teacher Database
Repository of Election Law Teaching Materials (2011 update)
Blogroll/Political News Sites
All About Redistricting (Justin Levitt)
American Constitution Society
Balkinization
Ballot Access News
Brennan Center for Justice
The Brookings Institution's Campaign Finance Page
Buzzfeed Politics
California Election Law (Randy Riddle)
Caltech-MIT/Voting Technology Project (and link to voting technology listserv)
The Caucus (NY Times)
Campaign Legal Center (Blog)
Campaign Finance Institute
Center for Competitive Politics (Blog)
Center for Governmental Studies
Doug Chapin (HHH program)
Concurring Opinions
CQ Politics
Demos
Election Updates
Fairvote
Election Law@Moritz
Electionline.org
Equal Vote (Dan Tokaji)
Federal Election Commission
The Fix (WaPo)
The Hill
How Appealing
Initiative and Referendum Institute
Legal Theory (Larry Solum)
Political Activity Law
Political Wire
Politico
Prawfsblawg
Roll Call
SCOTUSblog
Summary Judgments (Loyola Law faculty blog)
Talking Points Memo
UC Irvine Center for the Study of Democracy
UC Irvine School of Law
USC-Caltech Center for the Study of Law and Politics
The Volokh Conspiracy
Votelaw blog (Ed Still)
Washington Post Politics
Why Tuesday?
Recent Newspapers and Magazine Commentaries
Is Campaign Disclosure Heading Back to the Supreme Court? Don’t expect to see Karl Rove’s Rolodex just yet, Slate, May 16, 2012
Unleash the Hounds Why Justice Souter should publish his secret dissent in Citizens United, Slate, May 16, 2012
Why Washington Can’t Be Fixed; And is about to get a lot worse, Slate, May 9, 2012
Let John Edwards Go! Edwards may be a liar and a philanderer, but his conviction will do more harm than good, Slate, April 23, 2012
The Real Loser of the Scott Walker Recall? The State of Wisconsin, The New Republic, April 13, 2012
A Court of Radicals: If the justices strike down Obamacare, it may have grave political implications for the court itself, Slate, March 30, 2012
Of Super PACs and Corruption, Politico, March 22, 2012
Texas Voter ID Law May Be Headed to the Supreme Court, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Mar. 13, 2012
“The Numbers Don’t Lie: If you aren’t sure Citizens United gave rise to the Super PACs, just follow the money, Slate, Mar. 9, 2012
Stephen Colbert: Presidential Kingmaker?, Politico, Mar. 5 2012
Occupy the Super PACs; Justice Ginsburg knows the Citizens United decision was a mistake. Now she appears to be ready to speak truth to power, Slate, Feb. 20, 2012
Kill the Caucuses! Maine, Nevada, and Iowa were embarrassing. It’s time to make primaries the rule, Slate, Feb. 15, 2012
The Biggest Danger of Super PACs, CNN Politics, Jan. 9, 2012
This Case is a Trojan Horse, New York Times "Room for Debate" blog, Jan. 6, 2012 (forum on Bluman v. FEC)
Holder's Voting Rights Gamble: The Supreme Court's Voter ID Showdown, Slate, Dec. 30, 2011
Will Foreigners Decide the 2012 Election? The Extreme Unintended Consequences of Citizens United, The New Republic (online), Dec. 6, 2011
Disenfranchise No More, New York Times, Nov. 17, 2011
A Democracy Deficit at Americans Elect?, Politico, Nov. 9, 2011
Super-Soft Money: How Justice Kennedy paved the way for ‘SuperPACS’ and the return of soft money, Slate, Oct. 25, 2012
The Arizona Campaign Finance Law: The Surprisingly Good News in the Supreme Court’s New Decision, The New Republic (online), June 27, 2011
New York City as a Model?, New York Times Room for Debate, June 27, 2011
A Cover-Up, Not a Crime. Why the Case Against John Edwards May Be Hard to Prove, Slate, Jun. 3, 2011
Wisconsin Court Election Courts Disaster, Politico, Apr. 11, 2011
Rich Candidate Expected to Win Again, Slate, Mar. 25, 2011
Health Care and the Voting Rights Act, Politico, Feb. 4, 2011
The FEC is as Good as Dead, Slate, Jan. 25, 2011
Let Rahm Run!, Slate, Jan. 24, 2011
Lobbypalooza,The American Interest, Jan-Feb. 2011(with Ellen P. Aprill)
Election Hangover: The Real Legacy of Bush v. Gore, Slate, Dec. 3, 2010
Alaska's Big Spelling Test: How strong is Joe Miller's argument against the Leeza Markovsky vote?, Slate, Nov. 11, 2010
Kirk Offers Hope vs. Secret Donors, Politico, November 5, 2010
Evil Men in Black Robes: Slate's Judicial Election Campaign Ad Spooktackular!, Slate, October 26, 2010 (with Dahlia Lithwick)
Show Me the Donors: What's the point of disclosing campaign donations? Let's review, Slate, October 14, 2010
Un-American Influence: Could Foreign Spending on Elections Really Be Legal?, Slate, October 11, 2010
Toppled Castle: The real loser in the Tea Party wins is election reform, Slate, Sept. 16, 2010
Citizens United: What the Court Did--and Why, American Interest, July/August 2010
The Big Ban Theory: Does Elena Kagan Want to Ban Books? No, and She Might Even Be a Free Speech Zealot", Slate, May 24, 2010
Crush Democracy But Save the Kittens: Justice Alito's Double Standard for the First Amendment, Slate, Apr. 30, 2010
Some Skepticism About the "Separable Preferences" Approach to the Single Subject Rule: A Comment on Cooter & Gilbert, Columbia Law Review Sidebar, Apr. 19, 2010
Scalia's Retirement Party: Looking ahead to a conservative vacancy can help the Democrats at the polls, Slate, Apr. 12, 2010
Hushed Money: Could Karl Rove's New 527 Avoid Campaign-Finance Disclosure Requirements?, Slate, Apr. 6, 2010
Money Grubbers: The Supreme Court Kills Campaign Finance Reform, Slate, Jan. 21, 2010
Bad News for Judicial Elections, N.Y. Times "Room for Debate" Blog, Jan., 21, 2010
Read more opeds from 2006-2009
Forthcoming Publications, Recent Articles, and Working Papers
Fixing Washington, 126 Harvard Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (draf available)
What to Expect When You’re Electing: Federal Courts and the Political Thicket in 2012, Federal Lawyer, (forthcoming 2012)( draft available)
Chill Out: A Qualified Defense of Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws in the Internet Age, Journal of Law and Politics (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Lobbying, Rent Seeking, and the Constitution, 64 Stanford Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Anticipatory Overrulings, Invitations, Time Bombs, and Inadvertence: How Supreme Court Justices Move the Law, Emory Law Journal (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Teaching Bush v. Gore as History, St. Louis University Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (symposium on teaching election law) (draft available)
The Supreme Court’s Shrinking Election Law Docket: A Legacy of Bush v. Gore or Fear of the Roberts Court?, Election Law Journal (forthcoming 2011) (draft available)
Citizens United and the Orphaned Antidistortion Rationale, 27 Georgia State Law Review 989 (2011) (symposium on Citizens United)
The Nine Lives of Buckley v. Valeo, in First Amendment Stories, Richard Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, eds., Foundation 2011)
The Transformation of the Campaign Financing Regime for U.S. Presidential Elections, in The Funding of Political Parties (Keith Ewing, Jacob Rowbottom, and Joo-Cheong Tham, eds., Routledge 2011)
Judges as Political Regulators: Evidence and Options for Institutional Change, in Race, Reform and Regulation of the Electoral Process, (Gerken, Charles, and Kang eds., Cambridge 2011)
Citizens United and the Illusion of Coherence, 109 Michigan Law Review 581 (2011)
Aggressive Enforcement of the Single Subject Rule, 9 Election Law Journal 399 (2010) (co-authored with John G. Matsusaka)
The Benefits of the Democracy Canon and the Virtues of Simplicity: A Reply to Professor Elmendorf, 95 Cornell Law Review 1173 (2010)
Constitutional Avoidance and Anti-Avoidance on the Roberts Court, 2009 Supreme Court Review 181 (2010)
Election Administration Reform and the New Institutionalism, California Law Review 1075 (2010) (reviewing Gerken, The Democracy Index)
You Don't Have to Be a Structuralist to Hate the Supreme Court's Dignitary Harm Election Law Cases, 64 University of Miami Law Review 465 (2010)
The Democracy Canon, 62 Stanford Law Review 69 (2009)
Review Essay: Assessing California's Hybrid Democracy, 97 California Law Review 1501 (2009)
Bush v. Gore and the Lawlessness Principle: A Comment on Professor Amar, 61 Florida Law Review 979 (2009)
Introduction: Developments in Election Law, 42 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 565 (2009)
Book Review (reviewing Christopher P. Manfredi and Mark Rush, Judging Democracy (2008)), 124 Political Science Quarterly 213 (2009).
"Regulation of Campaign Finance," in Vikram Amar and Mark Tushnet, Global Perspectives on Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press (2009)
More Supply, More Demand: The Changing Nature of Campaign Financing for Presidential Primary Candidates (working paper, Sept. 2008)
When 'Legislature' May Mean More than''Legislature': Initiated Electoral College Reform and the Ghost of Bush v. Gore, 35 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 599 (2008) (draft available)
"Too Plain for Argument?" The Uncertain Congressional Power to Require Parties to Choose Presidential Nominees Through Direct and Equal Primaries, 102 Northwestern University Law Review 2009 (2008)
Political Equality, the Internet, and Campaign Finance Regulation, The Forum, Vol. 6, Issue 1, Art. 7 (2008)
Justice Souter: Campaign Finance Law's Emerging Egalitarian, 1 Albany Government Law Review 169 (2008)
Beyond Incoherence: The Roberts Court's Deregulatory Turn in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, 92 Minnesota Law Review 1064 (2008) (draft available)
The Untimely Death of Bush v. Gore, 60 Stanford Law Review 1 (2007)
Articles 2004-2007
Category Archives: chicanery
“Ethics Case Against Congresswoman to Resume”
NYT: “Leaders of the House Ethics Committee said Wednesday that they would move ahead with a long-delayed inquiry into allegations of impropriety by Representative Maxine Waters after concluding that committee missteps had not denied Ms. Waters a fair hearing in the case.”
“Nevada developer who donated thousands to Reid is indicted over campaign contributions”
AP reports.
“Democrats allege robocalls, ‘dirty tricks’”
The latest from Wisconsin.
“Constitution Check: When is making a campaign contribution a crime?”
Lyle Denniston writes for the National Constitution Center.
“The Edward Trial: Wrong Theory, Wrong Case, Wrong Place”
Very interesting Main Justice report.
Lyle Denniston on Siegelman Cert Denial
Here.
Supreme Court Declines to Hear Siegelman Case
According to the Court’s order list, there were no dissents. I am very surprised, and disappointed. The John Edwards case brought to the public’s attention the risk of criminal prosecutions based upon murky law and potentially overzealous prosecutors.
MORE from AP.
“John Edwards’ prosecution an uphill battle from the start”
This analysis will appear in the Los Angeles Times.
“John Edwards case shines light on hard-to-enforce campaign finance laws”
Politico reports.
“Did Edwards Mistrial Open Door to More Secret Money?”
Political Wire considers.
“How the Edwards Prosecution Stumbled”
Must-read Gerstein, who also notes: “NBC reported Friday morning that jurors split 8-4 for Edwards on the unresolved campaign finance charges and that only one juror favored convicting Edwards on a charge that he caused the filing of false reports with the Federal Election Commission.”
“John Edwards campaign fraud case likely to be abandoned”
The Guardian (U.K.) reports.
“Edwards Case Shows How Complex Campaign Finance Law Can Be”
U.S. News reports.
NYT on Edwards Verdict
“Edwards case may have little effect on campaign finance”
The News and Observer reports.
“Is John Edwards verdict the last straw for campaign finance?”
The CS Monitor reports.
“John Edwards’ Might’ve Walked But Trial Still A Warning For Politicians”
NPR reports.
“A Cad Gets His Due; The world knows that John Edwards is loathsome. That’s enough.”
Must-read Emily Bazelon on John Edwards.
Breaking News: John Edwards Not Guilty on One Charge, Jury Deadlocked on Others; Mistrial Declared
So reports ABC News.
John Edwards Verdict
The jury has reached a verdict. Stand by.
UPDATE: Jury Says It Can Reach Verdict on Only One Count of John Edwards Indictment
So still, stand by.
“As the jury in the John Edwards case deliberates a week with no verdict, how long is too long?”
AP reports.
“D.C. Mayor’s Administration Mired In Scandal”
NPR: “Washington, D.C., Mayor Vincent Gray was elected to office on a platform of anti-corruption. But just two years into his term, a federal investigation has left two former aides pleading guilty to misdeeds during the 2010 election. Gray has denied any wrongdoing. Host Guy Raz talks about D.C. politics with Washington Post reporter Nikita Stewart.”
MORE: A scathing WaPo editorial (via Election Law Center).
“Don’t Tweet Your Ballot”
Unless you want to face felony charges in Wisconsin.
“Sen. Tom Coburn admonished for helping former John Ensign aide”
WaPo: “The ethics panel focused its ‘qualified admonition’ on Coburn for his role in helping Hampton’s work as a lobbyist during the one-year period after leaving Ensign’s office, when he was still legally forbidden from lobbying the Senate.”
“John Edwards verdict could become part of Citizens United backlash”
The CS Monitor reports.
“First sign of progress from John Edwards trial jury”
But don’t expect a verdict before Memorial Day.
“Instructions may complicate Edwards jury’s task”
The News and Observer reports.
“Experts give odds to Edwards on appeal”
WaPo reports.
“In Edwards Case, Judge’s Words May Hold Key, Experts Say”
The New York Times offers this news analysis as we await the John Edwards verdict. The article discusses a point, which I make more fully in this Slate piece, tying the Edwards prosecution to those of Tom DeLay and Don Siegelman. (The Siegelman cert petition will be before the Supreme Court very soon.)
Is Mitt Romney A Unicorn?
Some people are not saying he is, but just asking the question.
Siegelman Cert Petition on Supreme Court Docket for May 31
Allison Hayward Also Has Some Worries About the Jury Instructions in the Edwards Case
See here.
I have suggested that Edwards will have strong grounds for appeal if he is convicted, based upon the jury instructions, the exclusion of testimony from former FEC commissioners, as well as a potential misunderstanding by the judge of the operative law.
Meanwhile, the NYT reports on the boredom of waiting for a verdict.
“Will “willfully” save John Edwards?”
CBS News reports.
“Six vying for third party run against indicted Rep. Smith”
The Chicago Sun-Times reports.
“John Edwards trial: What will verdict mean for campaign finance?”
The CS Monitor reports. The jury gets the case Friday morning.
John Edwards Resting Without Calling Edwards, Hunter to Stand: What’s Next?
The latest from the trial. From the second hand reports I’ve heard from the trial, this appears to be a sound strategy. Very little of the prosecution case focused on whether Edwards had the specific intent to violate campaign finance laws. While I had expected the prosecution to have a relatively easy time of it before a jury given how slimy Edwards is, I would now put some money on an acquittal.
And as I’ve said, even if there is a conviction, Edwards will have strong legal grounds on appeal.
“John Edwards defense: Justice Department flip-flopped”
Politico: “Defense lawyers for former Sen. John Edwards contend that the Justice Department set aside one of its standing policies in campaign finance cases in order to seek Edwards’s indictment on the charges he’s currently on trial for in federal court here. In a court filing late Tuesday, Edwards’s defense team submitted a letter the head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Branch wrote in 2009 stating that Justice only prosecutes federal campaign finance violations in cases that clearly run afoul of standards established by the Federal Election Commission.”
As I’ve written, there are serious risks when prosecutors can use unclear laws to go after politicians for criminal violations.
“Two witnesses say Edwards did not have to report $900k”
The latest: “Two witnesses with a wealth of knowledge about campaign finance laws testified in the John Edwards trial Monday that the $900,000 at the heart of the case went to personal expenses for the candidate – and therefore should not be subject to public reporting or campaign finance caps. The jury heard from one of the witnesses – a former Edwards campaign treasurer. But the other, a former Federal Election Commission chairman, testified outside the presence of the jury. The judge limited what he can say if he’s called to the stand later in front of jurors…Judge Catherine Eagles dealt the defense a blow Monday when she severely restricted what Scott Thomas, a former Federal Election Commission chairman, could talk about if he faces the jury. Thomas, who put in 37 years with the government agency that oversees campaign finance compliance and the issues related to it, took the stand Monday after the judge sent the jury home for the day. In a legal proceeding that must take place outside the jury’s presence, Thomas offered a glimpse of what he might say if called to testify. ‘These are intensely personal by their very nature,’ Thomas said of the $900,000 in payments used to support Hunter when she was pregnant with Edwards’ child, who is now 4.”
“The Public Eye: Capital-area voter fraud suspects have criminal histories”
SacBee: “The owner and an employee of a company accused of fraudulent voter registration drives in Sacramento County have been convicted of crimes of deception in the past. The owner of Momentum Political Services, Monica Harris, has an extensive criminal history, including a prison sentence for stealing from a family she befriended and buying a van with funds stolen from a youth agency, court records show. Two of her victims called Harris a ‘professional con artist.’…Jill LaVine, Sacramento County’s registrar of voters, has turned over evidence of what she called registration fraud to the California Secretary of State’s Office. She said that at least one-fourth of the 31,000 registration cards submitted by Harris and her circulators since September have been rejected for inaccuracies. Momentum Political Services was hired by the Republican Party of Sacramento County to conduct voter registration drives. LaVine said her office found numerous examples of people of having their political party affiliation switched to Republican against their wishes.”
Read the Don Siegelman Reply to Cert Petition Opposition
“John Edwards defense: prosecution theory OKs campaign-paid abortions”
“Judge refuses to dismiss John Edwards charges”
AP: “- A federal judge refused to throw out campaign corruption charges against John Edwards on Friday, meaning the former presidential hopeful will have to present his case to a jury.”
“Hatch Asks IRS to Investigate Leak of Marriage Organization’s Donors”
Bloomberg BNA: “Senate Finance Committee ranking member Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has asked the Internal Revenue Service to respond by May 29 with an investigation of how the National Organization for Marriage’s confidential donor information ended up in the hands of the Human Rights Campaign and a well-known news site….Hatch also said the 2008 Schedule B is a PDF document that ‘appears to have been deliberately altered in a manner to obscure information that would identify its origins with the IRS.’”
“Prosecutors’ gamble: not calling John Edwards’s mistress”
Buchanan Report
NYT: “Congressional ethics investigators concluded in a report released Wednesday that Representative Vern Buchanan, a Florida lawmaker who leads House Republican fund-raising operations nationwide, appeared to have tried to illegally influence the testimony of an ex-business partner regarding allegations of campaign finance violations in his own race. “
“Bread, Circuses, and the Edwards Prosecution”
Important Scott Horton piece at Harper‘s:
The DOJ’s public-integrity prosecutions have careened in recent years from one humiliation to the next, with little thought for the damage the department is doing to the law or to its own reputation. First came the prosecutions of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, both cases in which the department secured convictions through false evidence, as prosecutors suppressed exculpatory materials that established the innocence of the defendants. Then came the $40 million Alabama bingo prosecution, touted by Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer as a demonstration of the department’s commitment to stopping bribery in the legislative process. That case ended with acquittals across the board, after the evidence demonstrated not corruption, but the duping of the DOJ by political hacks with racist motives—as the judge himself pointed out….
The DOJ’s political prosecutions demonstrate its exceptional vulnerability to political manipulation, its absence of professional independence, and its consistent failure to exhibit mature, detached judgment. The Edwards case perfectly encapsulates these qualities, and leads to an inescapable conclusion: that the upper echelon of the Justice Department, whether under Democratic or Republican administrations, is filled with political hacks eager to pad their résumés before launching their political careers.
I discussed the danger of political prosecutions, including in the Edwards case, in this recent Slate piece.