On July 22, the final brief was filed in the 6th circuit in Citizens for Tax Reform v Deters, no. 07-3031. This is the case over whether Ohio can outlaw the practice of paying initiative circulators per signature. The lower court had ruled the law unconstitutional.
On July 19, the city of Modesto, California, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear City of Modesto v Sanchez, 07-88. The city argues that the California Voting Rights Act violates the U.S. Constitution. The California Voting Rights Act requires Modesto to stop using winner-take-all citywide elections to choose its 5-member city council. Since 1911, only one Hispanic city councilmember has been elected in Modesto, even though 25% of the city’s population is Hispanic. That fact pattern triggers the state law. The state law will force the city to use another election system, unless the city can persuade the U.S. Supreme Court that the California law violates the 14th amendment.
Washington state lets ex-felons register to vote, if they have been released and if they have paid all fines and made all court-ordered restitution payments. On July 26, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that nothing in the state or federal constitutions provides any relief for ex-felons who have not paid their fines or restitutions because they can’t afford to do so.
The case is Madison v State, no. 78598-8. The plaintiffs had argued that the effect of the law (requiring that fines and restitutions be paid before an ex-felon may register) amounts to a poll tax. The U.S. Supreme Court had struck down poll taxes in 1966. The Washington State Supreme Court rejected this analogy, saying that since ex-felons have no constitutional right to register to vote anyway, they cannot complain. The Washington State Constitution says “Elections Shall be Free and Equal” but the Court said that is irrelevant. Most state constitutions say “Elections shall be free and equal”, but state courts rarely seem to think that phrase means anything.
On July 25, the North Carolina House Election Law & Campaign Finance Committee passed SB 353. It provides that each U.S. House district in North Carolina would elect its own presidential elector. The bill had passed the Senate on May 24. It is likely to receive a vote in the House on July 26. The bill passed on a party-line vote, with Democrats voting “yes” and Republicans voting “no.” Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.
The only states that currently let each U.S. House district choose its own presidential elector are Nebraska and Maine.
On July 25, the Pennsylvania Senate State Government Committee held a hearing on HB 289, which moves the primary (for all state and federal office) from April 22 to February 12. From the comments of State Senators and also from the comments of witnesses, the bill seems to have little or no support.
