U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Legislative District Boundaries

Posted on by April 20, 2016
3

On April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Arizona’s legislative district boundaries. Harris v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 14-232. The decision is unanimous and is written by Justice Stephen Breyer. Harris v Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. Here is the decision.

The boundaries had been drawn by an independent redistricting commission. Arizona Republican office-holders are generally critical of the Independent Redistricting Commission, and had filed the lawsuit. They argued that the 2011 legislative plan should have created districts with greater equality of population, but the U.S. Supreme Court said 10% deviation for legislative districts is constitutional, as long as there appears no obvious partisan motive for the population deviation. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news and the link.

California Senate Elections Committee Passes Bill to Let General Law Cities Use Instant Runoff Voting

Posted on by April 19, 2016
2

On April 19, the California Senate Elections Committee passed SB 1288, which lets all California cities use instant runoff voting for their own city elections if they wish. Currently, only charter cities have that freedom. The bill received “Aye” votes from three Democrats on the Committee, Ben Allen, Loni Hancock, and Robert Hertzberg. The lone Republican member, Joel Anderson, voted “No”, and the remaining Democrat, Carol Liu, did not vote even though she was present. In California, legislators who abstain have the same effect as if they had voted “No.”

SB 1288 now goes to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The bill is sponsored by Senator Mark Leno.

U.S. District Court in New York Will Require Each County Board of Elections to Defend its Voter Registration Records in Court

Posted on by April 19, 2016
3

On April 19, U.S. District Court Judge Joanna Seybert, a Clinton appointee, held a hearing in Campanello v New York State Board of Elections, e.d., 2:16cv-1892. The case had been filed the day before on behalf of some voters whose registration records were faulty. In some cases the applicant’s voter registration had vanished; in other cases, voters had their party switched without their knowledge or consent. The plaintiffs wanted a court order letting the plaintiffs and similarly-situated voters correct the problems. Also the plaintiffs wanted an injunction letting any independent voter choose either a Democratic or a Republican primary ballot today.

The judge did not issue injunctive relief, but she keep the case alive, and in the next hearing, a representative of each county Board of Elections must defend its registration records. See this story. When the case resumes, it will be before a different U.S. District Court Judge, Judge Sandra Feuerstein, a Bush, Jr. appointee. An amended complaint is due April 26, and briefs on both sides are due by April 29.

Both Sides File Briefs in Independent Party Lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Sacramento

Posted on by April 21, 2016
14

On April 18, the Independent Party filed this brief in its lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court, Independent Party v Padilla. The Secretary of State has refused to ask California county election officials to tally how many registered voters the party has. So the party filed a lawsuit, eleven months after trying and failing to persuade the Secretary of State to change his mind.

Here is my affidavit setting forth some of the evidence in favor of the Independent Party.

A hearing will be held in Sacramento on May 2, Monday, at 1:30 p.m. Also on April 18, the state filed this brief. The Independent Party now has the ability to file a reply brief.