On November 18, the Fifth Circuit refused to reconsider its earlier decision in Voting for America v Steen, 12-40914. The issues are Texas laws which severely inhibit the activity of workers who register voters. Texas prohibits out-of-state residents from asking Texas residents if they wish to register to vote and from collecting applications from people who choose to register. Texas even prohibits residents of one county from working in another county. Texas also bans paying people to work on voter registration drives. Texas also prohibits registration drive workers from photocopying completed voter registration forms.

The original decision, refusing to enjoin any of these requirements, was handed down on October 3, 2013. Plaintiffs may seek U.S. Supreme Court review. Here is the request for a rehearing, which explains the issues in this case. The U.S. District Court had enjoined many of the restrictions but the Fifth Circuit had reversed.

As noted earlier, on September 4, 2013, U.S. District Court Judge M. Christina Armijo struck down Albuquerque’s ban on corporation campaign contributions in city elections. The case was Giant Cab Company v Bailey, 13-cv-426. The outcome was surprising, because the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently upheld laws that ban corporation campaign contributions. Citizens United v FEC did not involve campaign contributions; instead it involved independent expenditures by corporations. But Judge Armijo said the city didn’t explain why the ban was needed, and therefore she invalidated it.

For a while it was thought that the decision could not be appealed, because the Mayor and a majority of the city council approved of the decision. However, Pete Dinelli has intervened in the case and has appealed the decision to the Tenth Circuit. Dinelli, a Democrat, placed second in each of the last two Mayoral races. In the Tenth Circuit, the case is 13-2176.

A lawsuit has been pending in the Alabama Supreme Court since March 2013, over whether the Secretary of State has a duty to examine the qualifications of presidential candidates before she certifies them for the general election ballot. The case is Hugh McInnis v Chapman, 1120465. A co-plaintiff is Virgil Goode, who was the Constitution Party’s 2012 presidential nominee.

It is somewhat unusual for the Alabama Supreme Court to either refuse to hear the case, or to accept it, for eight months. This link has copies of the briefs.