Assignments

The Law of Politics The Legal Structure of Democracy Fall 2024

Dr. Alan Sager


All cases assigned should be briefed. It is best if you write brief for each case and  bring it to class unless you can commit your brief to memory in a way that you can answers questions about it. Other reading assignments should be summarized in writing and also brought to class.

NOTE: As we move through the semester, assignments are subject to modification. Check this page on a regular basis.

For each class day,  prepare the following assignments in the Hasen et. al.  Election Law textbook and supplementary materials linked on this page. Don’t assume that because we are behind in class,  you won’t be called upon to discuss the current day’s assignments.

Remember: When briefing cases, make sure  when your read dissents and concurrences, you can identify what complaints or arguments these opinions have with majority or plurality that decides the case, This will get easier and easier as you go through the class. Also, you might skim first few notes before you read the case because notes often highlight most  important parts of case.

Class 1  Monday  August 26th

Read pp 1-21 in Election Law textbook  Ellis piece on Pluralism is more detailed than we need. Data in note 9 to Ellis piece is interesting

Basic Political Theory 

Read Federalist 10     We will look at notes and  questions 1-5 as well.  (Presumably, most students have read this at one time or another.) This can easily be found on web as well. Here is  summary of notes and questions 1-5 in case you do not have text yet:

1. What is Madison’s  the definition of faction and can you easily identify groups to which the word refers?

2. The  Kristol piece focuawa on the public interest as a goal or a process. It quotes a political scientist Peter Shuck who says”To understand the role of special interest groups in the American polity today, then, we must define faction in a way that does not depend— as Madison’s de­finition manifestly does— on a transcendent conception of the public interest that no longer elicits strong defense or justification, even from those who most ve­hemently condemn pluralism’s processes and policies. All definitions of “spe­cial” interests can be criticized for being under-inclusive, arbitrary, or subjective. “

3. All laws benefit some faction and perhaps are a detriment to some other faction.  That is most laws have a zero sum effect though the people making them may make a claim that this is not true.  How does this relate to Madison’s view of factions and is it true.

4. “According to Madison, factions can consist of a majority or a minority of the pop­ulation, but only a majority faction is likely to have its way under a republican constitution­ Why? Many contemporary reformers, both conservative and liberal, believe minority interests too often can veto or bring about changes in a manner contrary to the public in­terest and opposed by the majority. Are these reformers wrong? Was Madison wrong? Have conditions changed in relevant ways since Madison’s time? What conditions?” from Hasen Chapter 1?

5. What is for  Madison the difference between a democracy and a republic.

Note: The textbook pages for all assignments are based on the 7th Edition of the Lowenstein et. al textbook. If you have an earlier edition, the pages will be different. We will cover recent Supreme Court cases that may not be in the 6th addition. You will have to go to the full text of more recent cases which can be found on the OYEZ and SCOTUS Blog websites among others.

On Burke speech. We will look at notes and  questions 1-5 (This is also a very famous piece. Know the categories of representation set out by Burke) The full version of this speech to the Electors of Bristol can be found on the web.  Here is one link  Click here   Version in this textbook  is 1 page or so.

Some other views of the electoral systems and elections.

Read for main points the following 3 articles. (One of the skills that should come out of this class is to learn to state briefly and succinctly the main points in case briefs (especially the facts and opinions), as well as  assigned articles, movies and so on.

Angelo Codeville  “Americas Ruling Class, The Perils of Democracy” (click here)     This is a long article that can be summarized  in many ways. Read it quickly to get the main point which is about the title.  The article is 14 years old and foreshadowed Trumps ascent in 2016. Obviously, there are counter arguments to his position.

Irving Kristol on idolatry of democratic machinery    1 page  (click here)

Judge Napolitano   “What If Democracy Is A Fraud”  2.5 pages    (click here)

If you want to know how Congressman Lloyd Doggett got his start in politics, check out this article from a 1973 issue of the Texas Observer entitled “Polling for Doggett”  by Dr. Sager
It is a step by step description of the work Dr. Sager and his then firm Political Research Associates did as pollsters and consultants for Lloyd Doggett who was running in his first race.
He ran for State Senator in a special election in July 1973 and then won a runoff in August 1973. (click here)


Class 2 Wednesday August 28th

We will spend a little more time on the articles assigned for Class 1.

II.  Right To vote 1. Read Brief History pp 31-54 Read Note 5 pp 52 It contains some data. Are the conclusions from the data correct? Why or why not?

The notes after each case will help students focus on important arguments, ideas, concepts, words, etc. in the case.    Notes generally go into far more detail than we need for this class.   Dr. Sager will discuss more about using the notes as we go through the first several assigned cases.
Generally only the first few notes will be assigned. 

Brief Harper v. Virginia State Board of Education  54-58   Read Notes  1,2, 3 and 4 Pp 59-61

Brief Skafte v. Rorex   63-65  Read Notes 1 and  2 Pp 65-66

Brief Kramer v. Union Free School District   74-80  Read Notes 1, 2 and 3  Pp 80-81

 

 


Class 3 Wednesday September 4th

Chapter 3 Representation and Redistricting 86-88

Brief Reynolds v. Simms  Pp 88-95

Brief Lucas v. 44th Colorado Assembly of Colorado Pages 95-99   Read notes 2 , 3 and 10. See Dr, Sager’s brief of case on syllabus page.  it  is more detailed than you need to be with your daily briefs

Brief Avery v Midland County Pp 115-121  Read Notes 1 and 3  Pp 121 and 123


Class 4   Monday  September 9th

Representation and Redistricting II

Brief Sayler Land v. Tulare Lake Basin Pp 124-131   Read Notes 1, 2 and 3  Pp 131-132

Read Pp 138-147 Districting  Criteria

Chapter 4 Partisan gerrymandering and Political Competition

Read  Defining and Identifying Gerymandering Pp  149-150, Read Notes 1 , 2 and 3 Pp 151-154

Discussion of movie: Mr Smith Goes To Washington.  What views about elections, Congress and representation are depicted.   Does this 1939 film have anything to say to us today?


Class 5 Wednesday September 11th

Partisan Gerrymandering and  Competition IIhttp://sites.la.utexas.edu/amcondev1/files/2024/0

Defining Gerrymandering Pp 149-150 Read Notes 1, 2 and 3 Pp 151-154

Gerrymanderinng and the Constitution Pp 160-164

Competition and Election Law Pp 160-165 Read Notes 1, 2 nd 3 Pp 165-166

The Long Partisan Gerrymandering Interegnum Pp 168-175

Brief  Rucho v. Common Cause Pp 175-202  Make sure you know the various arguments between majority and various dissents.

 

Today you will be assigned a  Supreme Court case related to this course to brief in 3 pages, 900 words at most.  While I recommend you get it out of the way before the first exam, it will not be due until Class 12

Your assigned brief can be found on list at (click here)

Brief form can be found toward bottom of Syllabus Page or the Law of Politics Website.

Happy Sunday. 

Mine is happy.  My fantasy football team is having a great day.  We are forecast to win our game. I play in a league called Family Ties
with nephews, grand nephews etc.

 


Class 6    Monday September 16th

Competition and Election Law  Pp 209-214

Brief   Miller v Cunningham Pp214-216   Read Notes 1,2,  and 3 Pp 216-218

Race and Redistricting   Section 5 of Voting Rights Act  Pp 221-222

Brief Allen v. Board of Elections   Pp 222-225 Read Notes 1,2 and 3   pp 225-226

Brief Beer v United States Pp 226-229 and   Read  Notes  1,2,3,4 and 5 Pp 229-234
Dr. Sager will discuss Georgia v Ashcroft which is the subject of note 5.

Brief Shelby County v. Holder  Pp 242-261   Read  Notes 1, 2, 3 and 4  Pp 261-264

Read and get a “kick” out of  a modern day reference to Mr Smith entitled “Mr Smith Tried To Go To Nashville”  (click here)
The writer’s  blog is “Misrule of Law” and is a friend.  He is  U.T. law graduate and had
a long career as a corporate lawyer in California.

We will discuss  Hemingway book Rigged.  Chapters 1-3  Good idea not to wait till night  before class to read.  If you fact check anything in book, let class know what you did and what you found.  She has a point of view as she goes through the events leading up Election Day 2020 and their impact on it. She also has a  point of view about those events as they happened. For the Washington Post review of book (click here) Here is the Guardian critique of the book (click here)
For MSNBC indirect comments on book (click here)


Class 7 Wednesday September 18th

Race and  Redistricting II

Section 2 of Voting Rights Act  Pp 265-266

Brief  White v Regester Pp 267-269  Read Notes 1,2 P 269  and note 5  Pp 271-272
Brief Thornburg v. Gingles  Pp 275-291   Dr. Sager will brief case with you. know Gingle test which is created in case.  Reads Notes 1,2 , 3 and 4  291-297, Read Note 8 Pp  299-300
Brief League of Latin American Voters v. Perry Pp 303-309 Read Notes 1, 2 and 4, Pp 309-312

Class Discussion movie     All The King’s Men. Another old movie that won many awards based on a historical novel about the Long family that dominated Louisiana politics in the first half  of the 20th century.  Where does this fit in if at all, with what we have covered so far and how does it relate, if at all to the  first movie.

 


Class 8 Monday September 23rd

Race and Redistricting III
Section II of Voting Rights Act II

Brief Bartlette v. Strickland  Pp 315-323  Read Notes 1,2  pp 323,  Read Notes 8 and 9   Pp 327
Brief Johnson v. DeGrandy  Pp 330-335  Read Notes 1 and 2 P 336
Brief Holder v. Hall Pp 338-346. 

Brief  Thomas opinion in Holder  v Hall    Make sure you know the other Justices’ opinions based on the note  in textbook on page before Thomas opinion.  p 338.  Use this  brief for the rest of the case Click Here 


Class 9  Wednesday September 25th

Exam #1

 

Exam will cover assigned reading and cases through Class 8, example briefs on Minor v. Happersett, Lucas v. Colorado Assembly and Holder v. Hall plus .movies Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and All The King’s Men. For cases with multiple opinions students are expected  to know the positions of various justices. Ashcroft v Georgia will not be
covered on the exam.  Ball v. James discussed in connection with Sayler  maybe. Students are also expected to know the content of the major Amendments affecting voting and elections as well as the appropriate parts of the Voting Rights Act. Lastly first 3 Chapters of Hemingway book will have some general questions on exam.


Class 10 Monday September 30

Race and Redistricting IV
Racial Gerrymandering
Brief Shaw v. Reno   Pp 349-360  Read Notes 1,2, and 3 Pp 360-363
 Post Shaw Decisions. Summarize Pp 365-379
Brief Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama Pp 379-383

Read Notes  383-384


 For those doing the poll watching assignment for their 2nd paper later in the course, you have to take a short online course which I did in a short time the ;ast time I taught the course.  https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/onlinepollworker.shtml

Also


Class 11  Wednesday October 2

Election Administration and Remedies
Constitutional Claims 

Read  Pp  391-394

Brief Bush v. Gore Pp  394-409  As an active participant in some events related to Bush v Gore, Dr. Sager will cover cases leading  up to Bush v Gore and notes afterwards
Read  Voting Technology  416-420 Also be sure tor review  chapters in Hemingway book.we have read where she talks about the history of voting methods and expectations in the Trump administration on election night 2020.  Did the Bush team have similar expectations in 2000?


Voter Identification and Other Burdens On Voting

Brief Crawford v. Marion County Pp 420-436. Read Notes 1, 2, and 3 Pp 437-438  Dr. Sager will briefly discuss some of his experiences with recounts and the handling of ballots.
For a summary of data on voter i.d. laws affect on fraud and turnout read this article from Vox (click here)

Is this study compatible with  Note 5 Pp 440-441 . If not, who is right.  Should the author
have noted contrary findings?  Does this tell you anything about the authors?
How does this fit in with the election administration  section of the book
related to remedies and Dr. Sager’s summary of  other
cases on judicial remedies.

For the Bush v Gore Chronology (click here) (As noted above,  Dr. Sager will cover this.  However, you should be cquainted with cases leading  up to Bush v. Gore,

Read  8 Views from Cathedral which  contains very short summaries  of various views of academics and judges  of Bush v. Gore.  Notice Alan Dershowitz position then and what he is supporting now (click here)


 

Class 12  Monday October 7th

Election Administration and Remedies I

Race Discrimination
Brief Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee Pp 443-465  Read Notes 1-2 Pp 463-464

Read interesting article about talking to public about environmental issues (click here)

Briefing Assignment due today.


Class 13   Wednesday October 9th

Law and Turnout
Read and summarize pp 469-488  Be able to discus material as if you were reading a case.

Also for this class, read the Texas poll watchers guide if you have never done so..  https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/forms/pollwatchers-guide.pdf

Read Mollie Hemingway   Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections Chapter 4,5, 6 and 8 We will discuss in class.

Be clear: If you are registered to vote in Travis County your assignment for the 2nd paper is to be a poll watcher at an early voting location.  Poll watching assignment sheets   will be handed out on Wednesday at  Class 17.  There can only be 7 poll watchers per location so signup for various locations will take lace on Wednesday as well. I will be checking to be sure the 7 watcher limit applies to early voting as well.


Class 14 Monday October14th

Election Administration and Remedies III
Judicial Remedies
Read Pp 488-491
Brief Pabey v. Pastrick Pp 491-499  Read Notes 1.2.3 and 4 P498

Other Remedies when election fraud is uncovered

Dr. Sager will discuss some other cases dealing with remedies, namely what can courts do to remedy  voter fraud or election violations when an election is over.   Hasen finally added a case like Pabey in this edition. For some reason remedies had been left out of earlier editions.  Any ideas as to why?  For summary of additional remedy cases (click here)

Be prepared to argue either side of the voter fraud issue  in class. 

Read about the Georgia Voter I.D. law and its impact (click here)

Read about voter i.d. and Bush v. Gore problems in Real Clear Investigations piece entitled “Oh, for the Good Old Days of Hanging Chads: The Legal Snarls of 2020” (click here)

The Heritage Foundation has put up a website that contains information of proven instances of voter fraud. (Click here)

For another point of view see The Brennan’s Center article The Myth of Voter Fraud  (click here)

Also read Slate article on myths about 1960 Nixon Kennedy election (click here)

Be prepared to discuss the movie All The President’s Men the Hollywood version of the Woodward Bernstein on the Watergate scandal.  Led by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford among others. the movie won 4 Academy Awards.  It covers the scandal up to Nixon’s reelection.  Compare it to our previous movies on concepts as role of the press, party loyalty, nature and importance of charges, view of the political and electoral process, behavior of main character etc..  . Dr. Sager first met Richard Nixon at a political event in 1965.  For a variety of reasons  he did not vote for him in 1968 or 1972.  If time allow , he will tell about the phone call he was cut into by mistake while in graduate school in 1968 involving what was likelly a bribe during election.

 

Chapter 7 Ballot Propositions

Pros and Cons
Read and summarize Ellis article pp 505-514  Read Notes 1,2,3,4, and 5  Pp 516-522

 


Class 15 Wednesday October 16th

Please bring a pencil to do an interim evaluation on the class so far.

Ballot Propositions II
Brief People’s Advocate v. Superior Court  Pp  529-534
Brief In Re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General Pp547-548
Read and summarize   The Separate Vote Requirement and Academic Criticism of the Single Subject Rule pp 559-562

Dr. Sager will discuss and summarize Procedural Requirement and  Judicial Review  pp 562-581

We will discuss  All The President’s Men.  Contrast and compare to previous two movies at least on the view of the press and elections, politicians motive, the roles of people around politicial candidates and officeholders, outcomes. impacts of the main character. Dr. Sager first met Richard Nixon at a political event in 1965.  For a variety of reasons he did not vote for him in 1968 or 1972.  If time, he will tell about the phone call relating to Nixon campaign he was cut into by mistake while in graduate school in 1968.

 


Class 16  Monday October 21st.

Chapter 8 Major Political Parties
The Party and the Political Process and Obligations of Parties Under the Constitution
Read and summarize pp 582-590

Dr. Sager will discuss The Texas White Primary cases Nixon v. Herndon, Nixon v. Condon  Grovey v.  Townsend Smith v. Allright Terry v. Adams

Dr. Sager’s summary of these cases (click here)

Read Associational Rights of Parties Pp 597-603

Does any of this material tell us about the lawful validity of the recent switch in the Democrat presidential candidate.

Brief   Tashijan v Republican Party of Connecticut PP 614-623, Read notes  1,2,3,4  and 5 Pp 623-625

Read Parties and Patronage Pp 640-642
Brief  Elrod v Burns  Pp 643-651  Read  notes

 


Class 17 Wednesday October 23rd

Finish up Patronage
Read notes Pp651-658
Read note 1 Pp 658-659

Dr. Sager will briefly summarize Chapter 9 Third Parties and Independent Candidate

Chapter 10 Campaigns
What We Know About American Political Campaigns
Read Pp 715-722
Regulating Campaign Speech
Brief 281 Care  Committee v Arneson PP 722-734. Read notes 1 and 2 734-736

Read about Susan B. Anthony League(SBAL) v. Driehaus . Driehaus was a former Congressman who sued this pro life group for claims about his abortion stance. A Federal District Court in Ohio held the Ohio law in this case unconstitutional on the merits. See the following newspaper article(click here)  for a report on that decision. The 6th Circuit reversed and the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the 6th Circuit and said SBAL made a claim that should be heard by the lower court that the 1st Amendment might be violated. Eventually, he dropped the case but the SBAL position that alleged campaign lies should be subject to strict scrutiny and result is similar to 281 Care Committee

Regulating Judicial Campaigns
Dr. Sager will briefly discuss Republican Party of Minnesota v. White and Williams Yulee v. Florida Bar and Caperton v. Massey,
all of which are covered in more detail in his Judicial Process class in Spring

We will discuss  Primary Colors with John Travolta as Bill Clinton during the 1992 primaries.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Class 18  Monday October 28th

Exam #2

Will cover all cases and readings since Exam 1
Movies All The President’s Men and  Primary Colors
Hemming way book Rigged  through Chapters 4,5,6, and 8
The exam will not cover the cases on Regulating Judicial Campaigns.  It will cover the Driehaus case in terms of what it was about and the final holding shown in the link that still works.
Exam will also cover readings  where assignment says “read and summarize.”

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Class 19 Wednesday October 30th

Bribery
Read Pp 801 -802

Write out the elements of bribery and read each case  with regard to what  element is being covered. Notice whether you personally think the fact situation shows bribery or activities that ought to be punished by the law.

Bribery of Candidates
Brief People v. Hochberg Pp 803-808  Notes 1, 2 and 3


Bribery of Public Officials Read Pp 811-815
Brief  People ex rel Dickinson v. Van de Carr Pp 816-817 Read notes 1,2, 3 and 4 P 818

Intent to Influence
Read Pp 819-821
Brief State v Agan  Pp821-824  Read notes 1, 2 and 3 Pp 824-827

Brief McCormick v United States Pp827-831 Read notes 1,2,3,  and 4 Pp 831-833

Brief United States v Sun Diamond Growers   Pp836-838  Note  1,2 and P 839

 


Class  20 Monday November 4th

Bribery
Official Act
Brief McDonnell v United States Pp 840-849  Read notes 1,2,3,4, and 5 Pp 849-851

Dr. Sager to discuss United States v. Ted Stevens if he has not mentioned it yet. (The Late Senator from Alaska)(click here) A while ago then President Trump  tweeted something that Greg Jarrett a lawyer and Fox contributor said about Bruce Ohr of FBI fame and his wife Nellie of Fusion GPS fame.  Namely, they may have violated federal bribery and related federal statutes while in their jobs.  Click here for Greg Jarrett piece. Suggestion about this in section entitled Nellie Ohr, about  2/3 of way down page. What do you think?

Campaign Finance

What are categories of campaign money.  Read  “Dark Money Basics” (click here)

The Buckley Framework

Introduction: Basic Facts and Figures about Campaign Finance  Pp 853-856
Buckley v Valeo:The Foundation of American Campaign Jurisprudence Pp857-859
Brief Buckley v. Valeo Pp 860-879 Read Noted 1,2,3,4, and 5 Pp 879-887

 

 


Class 21 Wednesday November 6th

Buckley v Valeo
Notes and Questions on the Courts Differing Treament
of Contribution and Spending Limits Notes 1,2,3, and 4 Pp 887-892
Read Empirical Observations  Pp 892-900

Preventing Corruption
On Campaign Finance Reform:The Root of All Evil Is Deeply Rooted Read Pp 900-905
Promoting Equality
Equal Dollars Per Voter   Read Pp 907-916

Spending :Limits
Brief First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti Pp 925-937

Make sure you understand the arguments on all sides of the issue. Here are some of the  questions we will consider.          Read Begin to acquaint yourself with some of the  empirical and theoretical justifications for campaign finance regulation in the notes.

These notes consider some of the following questions raised in Bucklety

1. What are the first amendment issues with campaign fiance?

2. What is the difference between an expenditure and a contribution?

3. What are the rationales for even regulating campaign financing?

4.Does regulation of campaign financing actually work?

5. How do various ideologies or theories of the how the United States does and should operate view the campaign finance issue, Republicans v. Democrats, pluralists, progressives, conservatives and so on?

6. Can you have a fair campaign finance law?

7. What campaign finance  issues can you think of that are not covered by the Buckley opinion.

Class 22 Monday  November 11th

Exam 2 return 


Limiting Spending and the Citizens United Revolution  Read Pp 957-960
Brief Citizens United v. FEC  pp 960 – 982   Read notes 1 through 10 Pp 988

This case is well known and either loved or reviled by different sides of the political spectrum. Former President Obama, no stranger to large sums of money,  in an unprecedented act, criticized  the case during his 2010 State of the Union speech, attended by most members of the  Supreme Court at the time.  Justice Alito just shook his head for national t.v. audiences.  For one PolitiFacts take on what the President said click here, though you might wait till you read the full case to view this column. This is a case about whether the campaign finance laws cover a corporation that makes a movie for the 2012 election cycle  about Hillary Clinton.  Late in the movie, an argument against voting for her is made.   You are assigned to read (or listen to)the oral argument and reargument(Court had it re-argued which is very unusual.  See if you can figure out something that may have been said in the original oral argument that might suggest case needs to be argued again)Try to write a brief or take notes on the various arguments made.  I am also including a link to myriad number of briefs filed by various political groups across the political spectrum on behalf of one side or the other. You might take a look at the first two pages of some of the briefs.  The first two pages contain in big print, the arguments made in the brief.  Usually, there are only 1 or 2 arguments made. We will read the edited case in the casebook for the next class.  Also students should watch the movie The Campaign by the 2nd of these two classes since it is Hollywood’s not so veiled attack on the Citizens United case.  You are in the process of learning the language of campaign finance law and  civil liberties law.   To help further acquaint you with the terms used in oral argument I have linked a glossary of terms and a brief summary of cases argued about in the oral argument.   Try to get the main points in the arguments.    Notice that future Justice Elana Kagan argues the case for the FEC in the re-argument.   In part this was due to the incompetence, or better bungling of an important argument  by the FEC attorney, Mr. Stewart, in the first case.  See  if you agree with my assessment.

Read or listen to the oral argument or re-argument  in Citizens United v. FEC  Original Argument  Transcript (click here) Rearguments    Transcript (Click here) For MP3 oral argument and reargument (click here) (This is the case page on the Oyez website.  It has links to all parts of the case including the MP3  recording of the arguments) Glossary of Terms including some cases used in oral argument  (click here

Probably best one of these items (transcript or actual oral arguments) is to read the Reargument.  I will focus on that more in class

Discussion:  The move  The Campaign with Will Farrell,   Zach Galifianakis    Warning there are several strongly antiChristian scenes,  foul language  scenes  and sexuallly explicit scenes and language. However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.  It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,  and Citizen’s United as you will see near the end of the film. The critics have a variety of viewpoints  including saying the film is politically well balanced and it  points our problems. One says “While many audience members may be suffering from political fatigue this election year, The Campaign exposes the process for the circus it truly is. ”  You decide for yourself.

However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.  It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,  and Citizen’s United as you will see near the end of the film. The critics have a variety of viewpoint including saying the film is politically well balanced and it points out our campaign finance problems.

`

 


Class 23 Wednesday November 13th

Brief  American Tradition Partnership v Bullock  Pp 989-990

Contribution Limits

Campaign Contribution In Ballot Measure Elections Read  Pp 991-995 Read Notes 1,2,3 and 4 PP 995-999
Think about hypothetical at end of notes.

When are Contribution Limits Too Low  Read Pp 999-1000
Brief Randall v Sorrells Pp 1000 – 1018  Read notes 1 and 2 1018-1020


Campaign Contributions and Political Parties Read Pp  1023-1027  Read  notes 1027-1031

For a lawsuit over spending limits in Austin City Council races and limitations on when campaigning for city office can begin.    (click here)

We will discuss the movie The Campaign

Discussion:  The movie  The Campaign with Will Farrell,   Zach Galifianakis    Warning there are are several strongly antiChristian scenes,  foul language  scenes  and sexuallly explicit scenes and language.
However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.  It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,  and Citizen’s United as you will see near the end of the film. the critics have a variety of viewpoint including saying the film is politically well balances points our problem

 

 

 


Class 24 Monday November 18

The Growth of Superpacs and Other Outside Groups Read Pp 1032-1034

Brief SpeechNow.org v FEC  Pp 1035-1039  and notes
The New Skepticism
Brief McCutcheon v. FEC Pp 1040 – 1066 Read notes 1 through 9 Pp 1066-1073

Become acquainted with this glossary of terms about campaign finance which includes case summaries as well as many words and terms used in the opinions(click here)

We will discuss the movie Our Brand Is Crisis What does this movie add to the movies we have already seen in this class. 

 


Class 25   Wednesday November 20th

Chapter 15 Public Financing
Read and summarize pp 1078-1101
Brief Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett  Pp 1104- 1131  Read notes 1 to 8 1131-1133.

epilogue

We will also discuss  remainder of Hemingway chapters ,8,9, 10, Epilogie and Note to Readers  Read this recent  article about some social science research  https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/06/robert-epstein-2022-midterm-elections-google-bing/

The questions always are: (1) What is misinformation and should something be done if it exists? (2) What are the constitutional limitations on controlling  lies and false staatements.  These will be big issues in my Civil Liberties class I expect to teach in Spring of 26.

We will also look back at the readings for our first class and see how they now relate to our course materials.  What cases have discussions  of issues directly raised in these readings  or can be related in some ways to these readings?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Class 26 Monday December 2

 

Disclosure
Read Pp 135-1136

Brief Buckley v Valeo  Pp 1136-1145 Understand arguments for and against disclosures  Dr. Ssger will brief this case
Brief McIntyre v. Ohio Elections  Pp1145-1161  Read Note 2 P 1161  Dr. Sager will brief this case, one of his favorites.

The New Skepticism
Read Pp 1164-65
Brief  Americans for Prosperity v Bonta Pp  1166-1188 Read notes 1,2,4 and 5 Pp 1188-1189
Why might this opinion be so long?   The secret is out but you probably missed it  in a major newspaper.

 


 


Class 27 Wednesday  December 4th

Exam #3

All cases and important notes  since 2nd exam will be on the in class part of this exam.  These begin with bribery cases and go through Americans for Prosperity v Bonta.   It  will also cover articles discussed in class and the oral reargument played in class which can be found on assignments for class 22  toward last 1/2 of reargument.
Know the glossary of terms used in campaign finance materials assigned for Class 24 and reviewed in Class 23
Finally exam will cover the last 3 chapters of Rigged  (Chapters 8 to 10 and Note To Readers) and movies,   Our Brand is Crisis   and    The Campaign.  There will be no makeups for this exam.  Of the 29 or so questions there will be 3 questions  on The  Campaign and 4 questions on Our Brand Is Crisis and 3-4 questions on Rigged. Because we have a class coming in after our class on Wednesday, you will need to work quickly. Exams will be handed out at 2:30. Objective will be picked up at 3:10 Then you will have 35 minutes for the essay which will  be on the exam.  

Rachel Thompson and I,  after much discussion,  decided the first  essay question will be a take home  essay which will be sent out Monday night. That will give you more time to do in class part on Wednesday.  Bring your take home essay to  class on  Wednesday. If you have a different location for taking exam, email your exam to me at my university emal.  Please put  your name on page 3.  You will have maximum of 3 pages,  250 words per page, for the take-home.  I will discuss it briefly during class 26 tomorrow.

If you are a senior who is graduating in December and will be walking across the stage at graduation,  you do not have to take the 3rd exam unless you want to raise your grade by doing better on Exam 3 than Exams 1 and 2.   Otherwise, I will use your average for first two exams as your grade on the 3rd one. Please let me know if you are a senior who is not taking  the 3rd exam. 

 


Class 28 Monday December 9th

This class will take place at Dr. Sager’s home.  It is the End of the Semester Awards Dinner. Special speaker is a lawyer who is working on ballot security in the western part of the U.S. She also does civil rights work.