Monthly Archives: July 2006

“Appeals court hears from lawyers in DeLay ballot battle”

The Houston Chronicle offers this news update, which begins: “A federal appeals panel indicated today that the ability of Republicans to replace former U.S. Rep. Tom Delay on the ballot rests on whether there was ‘conclusive’ evidence that he had moved to Virginia. The three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals did not indicate when it would rule. But questions from the panel seemed to favor the Democrats’ position that Republican officials could not declare DeLay ineligible for office based on residency prior to election day.” See also my earlier analysis, reaching the conclusion that the 5th Circuit is likely to affirm the district court’s decision preventing the party from naming a replacement for Tom DeLay.

Share this:

“Nevada Spending Limit Plan Challenged in Court”

Readers of this blog may recall the controversy over Prop. 77 in California—the test of the petitions circulated for signature of a redistricting initiative differed in some respects from the official version submitted to the Secretary of State. In the Costa case, the California Supreme Court held that the measure could remain on the ballot, because the differences were not significant enough to mislead voters. It appears Nevada now faces a similar controversy.

Share this:

“Lawmaker Wins Delay on Review of Evidence”

The NY Times offers this report, which begins: “A federal appeals court ruled Friday that the Justice Department cannot begin reviewing documents and other evidence seized from the Congressional offices of Representative William J. Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat at the center of a corruption investigation, until he is given a chance to review the material and return to court to argue that it should be kept from prosecutors.” For more details, see this post by Lyle Denniston of Scotusblog. Thanks to Steven Hueffner for the pointer.

Share this: