Have a Comment?
Generously Supported By
ELB Feeds and Email Subscriptions
Books by Rick
The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown (Yale University Press, 2012)
The Voting Wars Website
NOW AVAILABLE from
Barnes and Noble
Remedies: Examples & Explanations (Aspen Publishers, 3d ed. 2012)
Election Law--Cases and Materials (5th edition 2012) (with Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Daniel P. Tokaji)
The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore (NYU Press 2003)
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 Resources
Blogroll/Political News Sites
All About Redistricting (Justin Levitt)
American Constitution Society
Ballot Access News
Brennan Center for Justice
The Brookings Institution's Campaign Finance Page
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)
Excess of Democracy (Derek Muller)
Equal Vote (Dan Tokaji)
Federal Election Commission
The Fix (WaPo)
Initiative and Referendum Institute
Legal Theory (Larry Solum)
Mischiefs of Faction
The Monkey Cage
More Soft Money Hard Law (Bob Bauer
Political Activity Law
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
Recent Commentaries and Op-Eds
The Supreme Court Gives States New Weapons in the Voting Wars, Daily Beast, June 17, 2013
It's About the Disclosure, Stupid: The larger failing behind the terrible IRS treatment of Tea Party groups, Slate, May 14, 2013
Same-Sex Marriage: Court on the Couch, Reuters Opinion, Mar. 26, 2013
The Voting Wars Within: Is the Justice Department Too Biased to Enforce the Voting Rights Act?, Slate, Mar. 18, 2013
Who Controls Voting Rights?, Reuters Opinion, Feb. 26, 2013
After Scalia: Don’t Give Up on Campaign Finance Reform, However Hopeless It Seems Now, Slate, Feb. 21, 2013
If the Court Strikes Down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Reuters Opinion, Jan. 30, 2013
Democrats, Don’t Freak Out! Why Fear that Republicans Will Gerrymander the Electoral College are Overblown, Slate, Jan. 25, 2013
Big Money Lost, But Don't Be Relieved, CNN Opinion, Nov. 9, 2012
A Better Way to Vote: Nationalize Oversight and Control, NY Times, "Room for Debate" blog, Nov. 9, 2012
Election Day Dispatches Entry 5: Black Panthers, Navy Seals, and Mysterious Voting Machines, Slate, Nov. 6, 2012
Behind the Voting Wars, A Clash of Philosophies, Sacramento Bee, Nov. 4, 2012
How Many More Near-Election Disasters Before Congress Wakes Up?, The Daily Beast, Oct. 30, 2012
Will Bush v. Gore Save Barack Obama? If Obama Narrowly Wins Ohio, He Can Thank Scalia and the Court's Conservatives, Slate, Oct. 26, 2012
Will Voter Suppression and Dirty Tricks Swing the Election?, Salon, Oct. 22, 2012
Is the Supreme Court About to Swing Another Presidential Election? If the Court Cuts Early Voting in Ohio, It Could Be a Difference Maker in the Buckeye State, Slate, Oct. 15, 2012
Election Truthers: Will Republicans Accept an Obama Election Victory?, Slate, Oct. 9, 2012
Wrong Number: The Crucial Ohio Voting Battle You Haven't Heard About, Slate, Oct. 1, 2012
Litigating the Vote, National Law Journal, Aug. 27, 2012
Military Voters as Political Pawns, San Diego Union-Tribune, August 19, 2012
Tweeting the Next Election Meltdown: If the Next Presidential Election Goes into Overtime, Heaven Help Us. It’s Gonna Get Ugly, Slate, Aug. 14, 2012
A Detente Before the Election, New York Times, August 5, 2012
Worse Than Watergate: The New Campaign Finance Order Puts the Corruption of the 1970s to Shame, Slate, July 19, 2012
Has SCOTUS OK'd Campaign Dirty Tricks?, Politico, July 10, 2012
End the Voting Wars: Take our elections out of the hands of the partisan and the incompetent, Slate, June 13, 2012
Citizens: Speech, No Consequences, Politico, May 31, 2012
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)
Read more opeds from 2006-2009, and these from 2010-2011.
Forthcoming Publications, Recent Articles, and Working Papers
Political Dysfunction and Constitutional Change, 86 Drake Law Review (forthcoming 2013) (symposium) (draft available)
Is “Dependence Corruption” Distinct from a Political Equality Argument for Campaign Finance Reform? A Reply to Professor Lessig, 12 Election Law Journal (forthcoming 2013)
The 2012 Voting Wars, Judicial Backstops, and the Resurrection of Bush v. Gore, George Washington Law Review (forthcoming 2013) (draft available)
A Constitutional Right to Lie in Campaigns and Elections?, 74 Montana Law Review 53 (2013)
End of the Dialogue? Political Polarization, the Supreme Court, and Congress, 86 Southern California Law Review 205 (2013)
Fixing Washington, 126 Harvard Law Review 550 (2012)
What to Expect When You’re Electing: Federal Courts and the Political Thicket in 2012, Federal Lawyer, (2012)
Chill Out: A Qualified Defense of Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws in the Internet Age, 27 Journal of Law and Politics 557 (2012)
Lobbying, Rent Seeking, and the Constitution, 64 Stanford Law Review 191 (2012)
Anticipatory Overrulings, Invitations, Time Bombs, and Inadvertence: How Supreme Court Justices Move the Law, 61 Emory Law Journal 779 (2012)
Teaching Bush v. Gore as History, 56 St. Louis University Law Review 665 (2012) (symposium on teaching election law)
The Supreme Court’s Shrinking Election Law Docket: A Legacy of Bush v. Gore or Fear of the Roberts Court?, 10 Election Law Journal 325 (2011)
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)
Category Archives: citizen commissions
SacBee reports: “Radanovich’s federal suit contends that the panel violated federal voting rights law and the U.S. Constitution by seeking to protect three African American incumbents in the drawing of three Los Angeles congressional districts.”
The NY Times offers this editorial on the Arizona redistricting commission controversy.
Laurie Roberts: “Having said that, the remedy isn’t to go all banana republic(an) on us and try to toss the chairman on some trumped up charges.This not only makes the Republicans look desperate, it puts their own self interest on display in a most unflattering fashion. The Republicans should just do what every red-blooded, God fearing, flag waving American does: Sue.”
The Arizona Republic offers this report about this order issued by the Arizona Supreme Court today. This is major news for the vitality of the redistricting commission in Arizona. An opinion from the court will follow.
Morgan Kousser has written this oped for the SF Chronicle. It concludes: “If seeing neater lines that split somewhat fewer cities on a flat, featureless map and knowing that incumbents are busier than ever raising money are more important to you than preserving schools and health care, then by all means celebrate the Citizens Redistricting Commission. But don’t delude yourself that the new boundaries will lead to more moderation, many competitive districts, equal representation of minority ethnic groups or a viable state Legislature.”
Sac Bee reports on a new federal lawsuit.
Political Wire: “Arizona’s Republican-controlled state Senate voted to endorse Gov. Jan Brewer’s (R) removal of the independent chair of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, ‘triggering a rush to court and the likely start of an unprecedented constitutional battle,’ the Arizona Republic reports.”
Must-Read Az. Capitol Times Report on Incumbents’ Efforts to Influence Independent Redistricting Commission
According to The Fix, Republicans made gains with partisan redistricting but Dems made gains in states with redistricting commissions.
If this pans out, it is likely to increase Republican opposition to commission-based districting.
The end of this LA Times article notes: “Some minority rights groups, particularly Latinos, complained that the maps did not properly reflect their growth and threatened to sue in federal court. So far, none has.”
My good friends at Horvitz and Levy have the details, and the procedures of what may happen next in the courts.
The LA Times reports, with the subhead: “New voting maps, drawn for the first time by a citizens panel instead of by lawmakers, melded Rep. Howard Berman’s San Fernando Valley district with that of Rep. Brad Sherman, also a Democrat. Neither is yielding the ground, to the consternation of party leaders.”
This must-read NYT report suggests the difficulties of using “nonpartisan” administration in these very partisan times.
“California’s redistricting, by 14 citizens; I’m proud that we were able to eliminate partisan gerrymandering and draw 177 districts for the state Assembly and Senate, Board of Equalization and Congress on time and under budget.”
Cynthia Dal has written this LA Times oped.
LA Times: The senate plan now needs 504,000 signatures to be challenged in a referendum.
The Arizona Daily Star reports.
Here. It concludes: “Lawsuits don’t mean the process has failed. It had some holes, and there is room for improvement. But its mission has been accomplished. The political parties no longer pick their voters.”
How to sell this one to a more Democratic state? Likely it will focus on the potential for tax increases under a 2/3 Democratic Senate.
News from California.
The big question, assuming they raise enough money to qualify the referendum, is how they would sell a rejection of the lines to the voters. Don’t be surprised by ads claiming that the lines are not generous enough to Latinos.
Republicans must be kicking themselves for backing the citizen redistricting commission. I think the calculation failed at the level of the auditors’ office. That office, which winnowed down the commissioners, did not choose sufficiently partisan Republicans to serve on the commission who could block any plans which could dilute Republican political power in the state. See the complaint of the one Republican dissenter on the Commission: “This commission became the citizens’ smoke-filled room, where average citizen commissioners engaged in dinner-table deals and partisan gerrymandering — the very problems that this commission was supposed to prevent.”
If You Want to File a Writ Petition to Challenge California’s Redistricting, the CA Supreme Court Wants It Electronically
The virtual writ petition.
Arizona Appellate Court Issues Opinion Explaining Its Earlier Order Regarding Redistricting Commission Members
Or Neither. Soon the California Republican Party and MALDEF will need to decide whether and how to challenge the California redistricting plan, expected to be approved soon by the Citizen Redistricting Commission.
“The Democrats knew what they were doing, and Republicans were asleep at the switch.”
–California Republican Party Chairman Shawn Steel, commenting upon California’s Citizens Redistricting Commission.
My good friends at Horvitz & Levy have posted this item at their “At the Lectern” blog focusing on the CA Supreme Court.
The LA Times offers this interesting report. I see from the accompanying map that I am likely to be one of the voters who could well see a head-to-head Berman-Sherman matchup as fallout from this shift.
Roll Call reports.
No word yet on whether there will be a lawsuit, or an attempt to subject this plan to a referendum (and there’s some confusion over how that would work, if it happens).
“University of California-Berkeley Professor Bruce Cain has identified 13 [congressional] districts that could be in play under the new map.”
That’s Tony Quinn’s allegation. For Republicans like Tony who expected that a nonpartisan commission would lead to better outcomes for Republicans than Democrat-drawn plans, this must be a disappointing moment.