{"id":12,"date":"2022-06-27T16:19:00","date_gmt":"2022-06-27T16:19:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/?page_id=12"},"modified":"2024-12-02T02:28:17","modified_gmt":"2024-12-02T02:28:17","slug":"assignments","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/assignments\/","title":{"rendered":"Assignments"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n

The Law of Politics The Legal Structure of Democracy Fall 202<\/em>4<\/h1>\r\n

Dr. Alan Sager<\/span><\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\n\r\n

All cases assigned should be briefed. It is best if you write brief for each case and\u00a0 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.<\/p>\r\n

NOTE: As we move through the semester, assignments are subject to modification. Check this page on a regular basis.<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

For each class day,\u00a0 prepare the following assignments in the Hasen et. al.\u00a0 Election Law<\/strong> textbook and supplementary materials linked on this page. Don’t assume that because we are behind in class,\u00a0 you won’t be called upon to discuss the current day’s assignments.<\/p>\r\n

Remember: When briefing cases, make sure\u00a0 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\u00a0 important parts of case.<\/span><\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 1\u00a0 Monday\u00a0 August 26th<\/span><\/strong><\/h3>\r\n

Read pp 1-21 in Election Law textbook\u00a0 Ellis piece on Pluralism is more detailed than we need. Data in note 9 to Ellis piece is interesting<\/span>
<\/strong><\/h4>\r\n

Basic Political Theory\u00a0 <\/em><\/h4>\r\n

Read <\/em>Federalist 10\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 We will look at notes and\u00a0 questions 1-5 as well.\u00a0 (Presumably, most students have read this at one time or another.) This can easily be found on web as well. Here is\u00a0 summary of notes and questions 1-5 in case you do not have text yet:<\/h4>\r\n

1. What is Madison’s\u00a0 the definition of faction and can you easily identify groups to which the word refers?<\/p>\r\n

2. The\u00a0 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\u2014 as Madison\u2019s de\u00adfinition manifestly does\u2014 on a transcendent conception of the public interest that no longer elicits strong defense or justification, even from those who most ve\u00adhemently condemn pluralism\u2019s processes and policies. All definitions of \u201cspe\u00adcial\u201d interests can be criticized for being under-inclusive, arbitrary, or subjective. “<\/p>\r\n

3. All laws benefit some faction and perhaps are a detriment to some other faction.\u00a0 That is most laws have a zero sum effect though the people making them may make a claim that this is not true.\u00a0 How does this relate to Madison’s view of factions and is it true.<\/p>\r\n

4. “According to Madison, factions can consist of a majority or a minority of the pop\u00adulation, but only a majority faction is likely to have its way under a republican constitution\u00ad 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 in\u00adterest and opposed by the majority. Are these reformers wrong? Was Madison wrong? Have conditions changed in relevant ways since Madison\u2019s time? What conditions?” from Hasen Chapter 1?<\/p>\r\n

5. What is for\u00a0 Madison the difference between a democracy and a republic.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Note:<\/strong> 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. <\/span><\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

On Burke speech. <\/strong>We will look at notes and\u00a0 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.\u00a0 Here is one link\u00a0 Click here\u00a0\u00a0<\/a> Version in this textbook\u00a0 is 1 page or so.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Some other views of the electoral systems and elections.<\/span><\/h3>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Read<\/strong> 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\u00a0 assigned articles, movies and so on. <\/span><\/h3>\r\n

Angelo Codeville\u00a0 “Americas Ruling Class, The Perils of Democracy”<\/span> (click here<\/span><\/a>)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This is a long article that can be summarized\u00a0 in many ways. Read it quickly to get the main point which is about the title.\u00a0 The article is 14 years old and foreshadowed Trumps ascent in 2016. Obviously, there are counter arguments to his position.<\/h3>\r\n

Irving Kristol on idolatry of democratic machinery \u00a0\u00a0 1 page\u00a0 (click here)<\/a><\/h3>\r\n

Judge Napolitano \u00a0 “What<\/span> If Democracy Is A Fraud”\u00a0 2.5 pages\u00a0 \u00a0 (click here)<\/a><\/h3>\r\n

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”\u00a0 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<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 2 Wednesday August 28th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

We will spend a little more time on the articles assigned for Class 1.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

II.\u00a0 Right To vote<\/strong> 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?<\/h4>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

The notes after each case will help students focus on important arguments, ideas, concepts, words, etc. in the case. \u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong><\/span>Notes generally go into far more detail than we need for this class. \u00a0 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.\u00a0
<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\r\n

Brief<\/span> Harper v. Virginia State Board of Education\u00a0 54-58\u00a0\u00a0 Read Notes\u00a0 1,2, 3 and 4 Pp 59-61<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief<\/span> Skafte v. Rorex\u00a0\u00a0<\/span> 63-65\u00a0 Read Notes 1 and\u00a0 2 Pp 65-66<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief<\/span> Kramer v. Union Free Sch<\/span><\/span>ool District\u00a0\u00a0 74-80\u00a0 Read <\/span>Notes<\/span> 1, 2 and 3\u00a0<\/span> Pp 80-81<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 3 Wednesday September 4th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Chapter 3 Representation and Redistricting 86-88<\/p>\r\n

Brief Reynolds v. Simms\u00a0 Pp 88-95 <\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief Lucas v. 44th Colorado Assembly of Colorado Pages 95-99\u00a0\u00a0 Read notes 2 , 3 and 10. See Dr, Sager’s brief of case on syllabus page.\u00a0 it\u00a0 is more detailed than you need to be with your daily briefs<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief Avery v Midland County Pp 115-121\u00a0 Read Notes 1 and 3<\/span>\u00a0 Pp 121 and 123<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 4\u00a0\u00a0 Monday\u00a0 September 9th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Representation and Redistricting II<\/p>\r\n

Brief Sayler Land v. Tulare Lake Basin Pp 124-131 \u00a0 Read Notes 1, 2 and 3\u00a0 Pp 131-132<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Read Pp 138-147 Districting\u00a0 Criteria<\/p>\r\n

Chapter 4 Partisan gerrymandering and Political Competition<\/p>\r\n

Read\u00a0 Defining and Identifying Gerymandering Pp\u00a0 149-150, Read Notes 1 , 2 and 3 Pp 151-154<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Discussion of movie<\/strong>: Mr Smith Goes To Washington<\/span>.<\/strong>\u00a0 What views about elections, Congress and representation are depicted.\u00a0\u00a0 Does this 1939 film have anything to say to us today?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 5 Wednesday September 11th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Partisan Gerrymandering and\u00a0 Competition IIhttp:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/amcondev1\/files\/2024\/0<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Defining Gerrymandering Pp 149-150 Read Notes 1, 2 and 3 Pp 151-154<\/p>\r\n

Gerrymanderinng and the Constitution Pp 160-164<\/p>\r\n

Competition and Election Law Pp 160-165 Read Notes 1, 2 nd 3 Pp 165-166<\/p>\r\n

The Long Partisan Gerrymandering Interegnum Pp 168-175<\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0 Rucho v. Common Cause<\/span> Pp 175-202<\/span>\u00a0 Make sure you know the various arguments between majority and various dissents.<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

Today you will be assigned a\u00a0 Supreme Court case related to this course to brief in 3 pages, 900 words at most.\u00a0 While I recommend you get it out of the way before the first exam, it will not be due until Class 12<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\r\n

Your assigned brief can be found on list at (click here<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n

Brief form can be found toward bottom of Syllabus Page or the Law of Politics Website.<\/p>\r\n

Happy Sunday.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

Mine is happy.\u00a0 My fantasy football team is having a great day.\u00a0 We are forecast to win our game. I play in a league called Family Ties
with nephews, grand nephews etc.<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 6 \u00a0\u00a0 Monday September 16th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Competition and Election Law\u00a0 Pp 209-214<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0\u00a0 Miller v Cunningham<\/span> Pp214-216\u00a0\u00a0 Read Notes 1,2,\u00a0 and 3 Pp 216-218<\/p>\r\n

Race and Redistricting\u00a0\u00a0 Section 5 of Voting Rights Act\u00a0 Pp 221-222<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Brief Allen v. Board of Elections\u00a0\u00a0 Pp 222-225 Read Notes 1,2 and 3\u00a0\u00a0 pp 225-226<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief Beer v United States Pp 226-229 and\u00a0\u00a0 Read\u00a0 Notes\u00a0 1,2,3,4 and 5 Pp 229-234<\/span>
<\/strong>Dr. Sager will discuss Georgia v Ashcroft<\/span> which is the subject of note 5<\/span>.
<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief Shelby County v. Holder\u00a0 Pp 242-261 \u00a0 Read\u00a0 Notes<\/span> 1, 2, 3 and 4\u00a0 Pp 261-264<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Read and get a “kick” out of\u00a0 a modern day reference to Mr Smith entitled “Mr Smith Tried To Go To Nashville”\u00a0 (click here)<\/a>
The writer’s\u00a0 blog is “Misrule of Law” and is a friend.\u00a0 He is\u00a0 U.T. law graduate and had
a long career as a corporate lawyer in California.<\/p>\r\n

We will discuss\u00a0 Hemingway book Rigged.\u00a0<\/span> Chapters 1-3\u00a0<\/strong> Good idea not to wait till night\u00a0 before class to read.\u00a0 If you fact check anything in book, let class know what you did and what you found.\u00a0 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\u00a0 point of view about those events as they happened. For the Washington Post review of book (click here<\/a>) Here is the Guardian critique of the book (click here)<\/a>
For MSNBC indirect comments on book (click here<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

Class 7 Wednesday September 18th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Race and\u00a0 Redistricting II<\/p>\r\n

Section 2 of Voting Rights Act\u00a0 Pp 265-266<\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0 White v Regester Pp 267-269\u00a0 Read Notes 1,2 P 269\u00a0 and note 5\u00a0 Pp 271-272<\/span><\/span>
Brief Thornburg v. Gingles\u00a0 Pp 275-291\u00a0\u00a0 Dr. Sager will brief case with you. know Gingle test which is created in case.\u00a0 Reads Notes 1,2 , 3 and 4\u00a0 291-297, Read Note 8 Pp\u00a0 299-300<\/span><\/span>
Brief League of Latin American Voters v. Perry Pp 303-309 Read<\/span> Notes 1, 2 and 4, Pp 309-312<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Class Discussion movie \u00a0 \u00a0 All The King’s Men<\/span>.<\/strong> Another old movie that won many awards based on a historical novel about the Long family that dominated Louisiana politics in the first half\u00a0 of the 20th century.\u00a0 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\u00a0 first movie.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 8 Monday September 23rd
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Race and Redistricting III
Section II of Voting Rights Act II<\/p>\r\n

Brief Bartlette v. Strickland\u00a0 Pp 315-323\u00a0 Read Notes 1,2\u00a0 pp 323,\u00a0 Read Notes 8 and 9\u00a0\u00a0 Pp 327<\/span><\/span>
Brief Johnson v. DeGrandy\u00a0 Pp 330-335\u00a0 Read<\/span> Notes 1 and 2 P 336<\/span><\/span>
Brief Holder v. Hall Pp 338-346.\u00a0
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0 Thomas opinion in Holder\u00a0 v Hall\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span> Make sure you know the other Justices’ opinions based on the note\u00a0 in textbook on page before Thomas opinion.\u00a0 p 338.\u00a0 Use this\u00a0 brief for the rest of the case Click Here<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

Class 9\u00a0 Wednesday September 25th<\/span><\/h2>\r\n

Exam #1<\/span><\/h2>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

Exam will cover assigned reading and cases through Class 8, example briefs on Minor v. Happersett<\/strong>, Lucas v. Colorado Assembl<\/strong>y and Holder v. Hall<\/strong> plus .movies Mr. Smith Goes to Washington<\/strong><\/em> and All The King’s Men. For cases with multiple opinions students are expected\u00a0 to know the positions of various justices. <\/strong><\/em> Ashcroft v Georgia will not be
covered on the exam.\u00a0 Ball v. James discussed in connection with Sayler\u00a0 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.
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

Class 10 Monday September 30<\/span><\/h3>\r\n

Race and Redistricting IV<\/span>
Racial Gerrymandering
Brief Shaw v. Reno\u00a0\u00a0 Pp 349-360\u00a0<\/span> Read Notes 1,2, and 3 Pp 360-363
\u00a0Post Shaw Decisions. Summarize Pp 365-379
Brief Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama<\/span> Pp 379-383<\/span>
Read Notes\u00a0 383-384<\/span><\/h3>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0For 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. \u00a0<\/span>https:\/\/www.sos.state.tx.us\/elections\/onlinepollworker.shtml<\/a>
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Also<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 11\u00a0 Wednesday October 2
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Election Administration and Remedies<\/span>
Constitutional Claims\u00a0<\/span><\/h3>\r\n

Read\u00a0 Pp\u00a0 391-394<\/p>\r\n

Brief Bush v. Gore Pp\u00a0 394-409\u00a0 As an active participant in some events related to Bush v Gore, Dr. Sager will cover cases leading\u00a0 up to Bush v Gore and notes afterwards<\/span>
Read\u00a0<\/span> Voting Technology\u00a0 416-420 Also be sure tor review\u00a0 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.\u00a0 Did the Bush team have similar expectations in 2000?
<\/span><\/p>\r\n


Voter Identification and Other Burdens On Voting<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Brief <\/span>Crawford v. Marion County Pp 420-436. Read Notes 1, 2, and 3 Pp 437-438\u00a0 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<\/a>)<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Is this study compatible with\u00a0 Note 5 Pp 440-441 . If not, who is right.\u00a0 Should the author
have noted contrary findings?\u00a0 Does this tell you anything about the authors?
How does this fit in with the election administration\u00a0 section of the book
related to remedies and Dr. Sager’s summary of\u00a0 other
cases on judicial remedies.<\/p>\r\n

For the Bush v Gore Chronology (click here<\/a>) (As noted above,\u00a0 Dr. Sager will cover this.\u00a0 However, you should be cquainted with cases leading\u00a0 up to Bush v. Gore,<\/p>\r\n

Read\u00a0 8 Views from Cathedral which\u00a0 contains very short summaries\u00a0 of various views of academics and judges\u00a0 of Bush v. Gore.\u00a0 Notice Alan Dershowitz position then and what he is supporting now (click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 12\u00a0 Monday October 7th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Election Administration and Remedies I<\/p>\r\n

Race Discrimination
Brief Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee<\/span> Pp 443-465\u00a0 Read Notes 1-2 Pp 463-464
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Read interesting article about talking to public about environmental issues (click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Briefing Assignment due today<\/span><\/strong>.<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 13\u00a0\u00a0 Wednesday October 9th<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Law and Turnout<\/strong>
Read and summarize pp 469-488\u00a0 Be able to discus material as if you were reading a case.<\/p>\r\n

Also for this class, read the Texas poll watchers guide if you have never done so.. \u00a0https:\/\/www.sos.state.tx.us\/elections\/forms\/pollwatchers-guide.pdf<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Read Mollie Hemingway\u00a0\u00a0 Rigge<\/strong>d: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections<\/strong><\/span> Chapter 4,5, 6 and 8 We will discuss in class.

<\/p>\r\n

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.\u00a0 Poll watching assignment sheets\u00a0\u00a0 will be handed out on Wednesday at\u00a0 Class 17.\u00a0 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.<\/span> <\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 14 Monday October14th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Election Administration and Remedies III
Judicial Remedies
Read Pp 488-491
Brief Pabey v. Pastrick Pp 491-499\u00a0 Read Notes 1.2.3 and 4 P498<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n

Other Remedies when election fraud is uncovered<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager will discuss some other cases dealing with remedies, namely what can courts do to remedy\u00a0 voter fraud or election violations when an election is over.\u00a0\u00a0 Hasen finally added a case like Pabey in this edition. For some reason remedies had been left out of earlier editions.\u00a0 Any ideas as to why?\u00a0 For summary of additional remedy cases (click here<\/a>)
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Be prepared to argue either side of the voter fraud issue\u00a0 in class.\u00a0
<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\r\n

Read about the Georgia Voter I.D. law and its impact (click here<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

The Heritage Foundation has put up a website that contains information of proven instances of voter fraud. (Click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

For another point of view see The Brennan’s Center article The Myth of Voter Fraud\u00a0 (click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

Also read Slate article on myths about 1960 Nixon Kennedy election (click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Be prepared to discuss the movie All The President’s Men<\/strong><\/span> the Hollywood version of the Woodward Bernstein on the Watergate scandal.\u00a0 Led by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford among others. the movie won 4 Academy Awards.\u00a0 It covers the scandal up to Nixon’s reelection.\u00a0 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..\u00a0 . Dr. Sager first met Richard Nixon at a political event in 1965.\u00a0 For a variety of reasons\u00a0 he did not vote for him in 1968 or 1972.\u00a0 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.<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

Chapter 7 Ballot Propositions<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Pros and Cons
Read and summarize Ellis article pp 505-514\u00a0 Read Notes 1,2,3,4, and 5\u00a0 Pp 516-522<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/span><\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 15 Wednesday October 16th<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Please bring a pencil to do an interim evaluation on the class so far.<\/p>\r\n

Ballot Propositions II
Brief People’s Advocate v. Superior Court\u00a0 Pp\u00a0 529-534<\/span>
Brief In Re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General Pp547-548
Read and summarize<\/span> \u00a0 The Separate Vote Requirement and Academic Criticism of the Single Subject Rule pp 559-562<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager will discuss and summarize Procedural Requirement and\u00a0 Judicial Review\u00a0 pp 562-581<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

We will discuss\u00a0 All The President’s Men<\/span><\/strong>.\u00a0 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.\u00a0 For a variety of reasons he did not vote for him in 1968 or 1972.\u00a0 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.<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 16\u00a0 Monday October 21st. <\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Chapter 8 Major Political Parties
The Party and the Political Process and Obligations of Parties Under the Constitution
Read and summarize pp 582-590<\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager will discuss The Texas White Primary cases Nixon v. Herndon, Nixon v. Condon<\/span>\u00a0 Grovey v.\u00a0 Townsend<\/span> Smith v. Allright<\/span> Terry v. Adams<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager’s summary of these cases (click here)<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Read Associational Rights of Parties Pp 597-603<\/p>\r\n

Does any of this material tell us about the lawful validity of the recent switch in the Democrat presidential candidate.<\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0\u00a0 Tashijan v Republican Party of Connecticut PP 614-623<\/span>,<\/span> Read notes\u00a0 1,2,3,4\u00a0 and 5 Pp 623-625<\/p>\r\n

Read Parties and Patronage Pp 640-642
Brief\u00a0 Elrod v Burns\u00a0 Pp 643-651<\/span>\u00a0 Read\u00a0 notes<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 17 Wednesday October 23rd
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Finish up Patronage
Read notes Pp651-658
Read note 1 Pp 658-659<\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager will briefly summarize Chapter 9 Third Parties and Independent Candidate<\/p>\r\n

Chapter 10 Campaigns
What We Know About American Political Campaigns
Read Pp 715-722
Regulating Campaign Speech
Brief 281 Care\u00a0 Committee v Arneson PP 722-734. Read notes 1 and 2 734-736
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Read about Susan B. Anthony League(SBAL) v. Driehaus<\/strong> . 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)\u00a0<\/a> 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<\/p>\r\n

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

We will discuss\u00a0 Primary Colors<\/span> with John Travolta as Bill Clinton during the 1992 primaries.<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\r\n

Class 18\u00a0 Monday October 28th<\/p>\r\n

Exam #2<\/h3>\r\n

Will cover all cases and readings since Exam 1
Movies All The President’s Men<\/span><\/strong> and\u00a0 Primary Colors<\/span><\/strong>
Hemming way book Rigged\u00a0 through Chapters 4,5,6, and 8
The exam will not cover the cases on Regulating Judicial Campaigns.\u00a0 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\u00a0 where assignment says “read and summarize.”<\/p>\r\n

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\r\n

Class 19 Wednesday October 30th<\/p>\r\n

Bribery
Read Pp 801 -802<\/p>\r\n

Write out the elements of bribery and read each case\u00a0 with regard to what\u00a0 element is being covered. Notice whether you personally think the fact situation shows bribery or activities that ought to be punished by the law.<\/p>\r\n

Bribery of Candidates
Brief People v. Hochberg Pp 803-808\u00a0 Notes 1, 2 and<\/span> 3
<\/span><\/p>\r\n


Bribery of Public Officials Read Pp 811-815
Brief\u00a0 People ex rel Dickinson v. Van de Carr Pp 816-817 Read notes 1,2, 3 and 4 P 818<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Intent to Influence
Read Pp 819-821
Brief State v Agan<\/span>\u00a0 Pp821-824\u00a0 <\/span>Read notes 1, 2 and 3 Pp 824-827<\/p>\r\n

Brief McCormick v United States<\/span> Pp827-831<\/span> Read notes 1,2,3,\u00a0 and 4 Pp 831-833<\/p>\r\n

Brief United States v Sun Diamond Growers\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0 Pp836-838<\/span>\u00a0 Note\u00a0 1,2 and P 839<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class\u00a0 20 Monday November 4th<\/strong>
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Bribery
Official Act
Brief<\/span> McDonnell v United States Pp 840-849\u00a0<\/span> Read notes 1,2,3,4, and 5 Pp 849-851<\/p>\r\n

Dr. Sager to discuss United States v. Ted Stevens if he has not mentioned it yet. (The Late Senator from Alaska)(click here<\/a>) A while ago then President Trump\u00a0 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.\u00a0 Namely, they may have violated federal bribery and related federal statutes while in their jobs.\u00a0 Click here<\/a> for Greg Jarrett piece. Suggestion about this in section entitled Nellie Ohr, about\u00a0 2\/3 of way down page. What do you think?<\/p>\r\n

Campaign Finance<\/h2>\r\n

What are categories of campaign money.\u00a0 Read\u00a0 “Dark Money Basics” (click here<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n

The Buckley Framework<\/p>\r\n

Introduction: Basic Facts and Figures about Campaign Finance\u00a0 Pp 853-856
Buckley v Valeo:The Foundation of American Campaign Jurisprudence Pp857-859
Brief Buckley v. Valeo <\/span><\/span>Pp 860-879<\/span> Read Noted 1,2,3,4, and 5 Pp 879-887<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 21 Wednesday November 6th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

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\u00a0 Pp 892-900<\/p>\r\n

Preventing Corruption
On Campaign Finance Reform:The Root of All Evil Is Deeply Rooted Read Pp 900-905
Promoting Equality
Equal Dollars Per Voter\u00a0\u00a0 Read Pp 907-916<\/p>\r\n

Spending :Limits
Brief First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti <\/span><\/span>Pp 925-937<\/p>\r\n

Make sure you understand the arguments on all sides of the issue. Here are some of the\u00a0 questions we will consider. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong> \u00a0\u00a0 Read<\/strong> Begin to acquaint yourself with some of the\u00a0 empirical and theoretical justifications for campaign finance regulation in the notes.<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

These notes consider some of the following questions raised in Bucklety<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

1. What are the first amendment issues with campaign fiance?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

2. What is the difference between an expenditure and a contribution?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

3. What are the rationales for even regulating campaign financing?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

4.Does regulation of campaign financing actually work?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

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?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

6. Can you have a fair campaign finance law?<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

7. What campaign finance\u00a0 issues can you think of that are not covered by the Buckley opinion.<\/p>\r\n

Class 22 Monday\u00a0 November 11th<\/h3>\r\n

Exam 2 return\u00a0<\/p>\r\n


Limiting Spending and the Citizens United Revolution\u00a0 Read Pp 957-960
Brief Citizens United v. FEC\u00a0 pp 960 – 982<\/span>\u00a0\u00a0 Read notes 1 through 10 Pp 988<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/h1>\r\n

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,\u00a0 in an unprecedented act, criticized\u00a0 the case during his 2010 State of the Union speech, attended by most members of the\u00a0 Supreme Court at the time.\u00a0 Justice Alito just shook his head for national t.v. audiences.\u00a0 For one PolitiFacts take on what the President said click here,<\/a> 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\u00a0 about Hillary Clinton.\u00a0 Late in the movie, an argument against voting for her is made. \u00a0 You are assigned to read (or listen to)the oral argument and reargument(Court had it re-argued which is very unusual.\u00a0 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.\u00a0 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.\u00a0 The first two pages contain in big print, the arguments made in the brief.\u00a0 Usually, there are only 1 or 2 arguments made. We will read the edited case in the casebook for the next class.\u00a0 Also students should watch the movie The Campaign<\/strong> by the 2nd of these two classes since it is Hollywood’s not so veiled attack on the Citizens United<\/strong> case.\u00a0 You are in the process of learning the language of campaign finance law and\u00a0 civil liberties law. \u00a0<\/strong> 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.\u00a0\u00a0 Try to get the main points in the arguments.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Notice that future Justice Elana Kagan argues the case for the FEC in the re-argument.\u00a0\u00a0 In part this was due to the incompetence, or better bungling of an important argument\u00a0 by the FEC attorney, Mr. Stewart, in the first case.\u00a0 See\u00a0 if you agree with my assessment.<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/h1>\r\n

Read or listen<\/strong> to the oral argument or re-argument\u00a0 in Citizens United v. FEC\u00a0 Original Argument\u00a0 Transcript (click here)<\/a> Rearguments\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Transcript (Click here) <\/a>For MP3 oral argument and reargument (click here<\/a>) (This is the case page on the Oyez website.\u00a0 It has links to all parts of the case including the MP3\u00a0 recording of the arguments) Glossary of Terms including some cases used in oral argument\u00a0 (click here<\/a><\/p>\r\n

Probably best one of these items (transcript or actual oral arguments) is to read the Reargument.\u00a0 I will focus on that more in class<\/p>\r\n

Discussion:\u00a0<\/strong> The move\u00a0 The Campaign<\/strong><\/span> with Will Farrell,\u00a0\u00a0 Zach Galifianakis\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Warning there are several strongly antiChristian scenes,\u00a0 foul language\u00a0 scenes\u00a0 and sexuallly explicit scenes and language. However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.\u00a0 It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,\u00a0 and Citizen’s United as you will see near the end of the film. The critics have a variety of viewpoints\u00a0 including saying the film is politically well balanced and it\u00a0 points our problems. One says “While many audience members may be suffering from political fatigue this election year, The Campaign<\/strong> exposes the process for the circus it truly is. ”\u00a0 You decide for yourself.<\/p>\r\n

However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.\u00a0 It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,\u00a0 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.<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

`<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/h1>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class <\/strong>23 Wednesday November 13th<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Brief\u00a0 American Tradition Partnership v Bullock<\/span><\/span>\u00a0 Pp 989-990<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Contribution Limits<\/p>\r\n

Campaign Contribution In Ballot Measure Elections Read\u00a0 Pp 991-995 Read Notes 1,2,3 and 4 PP 995-999
Think about hypothetical at end of notes.

<\/p>\r\n

When are Contribution Limits Too Low\u00a0 Read Pp 999-1000
Brief Randall v Sorrells<\/span> Pp 1000 – 1018\u00a0 Read notes 1 and 2 1018-1020<\/p>\r\n


Campaign Contributions and Political Parties Read<\/strong> Pp\u00a0 1023-1027\u00a0 Read\u00a0<\/strong> notes 1027-1031

<\/p>\r\n

For a lawsuit over spending limits in Austin City Council races and limitations on when campaigning for city office can begin.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (click here<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n

We will discuss the movie The Campaign
<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Discussion:\u00a0 The movie\u00a0 The Campaign with Will Farrell,<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0 Zach Galifianakis\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Warning there are are several strongly antiChristian scenes,\u00a0 foul language\u00a0 scenes\u00a0 and sexuallly explicit scenes and language.
However, film did well, grossing over $100 million in 2012.\u00a0 It is Hollywood’s attack on both the Koch brothers, political contributions,\u00a0 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<\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 24 Monday November 18
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

The Growth of Superpacs and Other Outside Groups Read Pp 1032-1034<\/p>\r\n

Brief SpeechNow.org v FEC\u00a0 Pp 1035-1039\u00a0 and notes<\/span><\/span>
The New Skepticism
Brief McCutcheon v. FEC<\/span> Pp 1040 – 1066 Read notes 1 through 9 Pp 1066-1073<\/p>\r\n

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<\/a>)<\/p>\r\n

We will discuss the movie Our Brand Is Crisis<\/span>.\u00a0<\/strong> What does this movie add to the movies we have already seen in this class.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 25 \u00a0 Wednesday November 20th
<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Chapter 15 Public Financing
Read and summarize pp 1078-1101
Brief Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett\u00a0 Pp 1104- 1131\u00a0<\/span> Read notes 1 to 8 1131-1133.<\/span>
<\/span><\/p>\r\n

epilogue<\/p>\r\n

We will also discuss\u00a0 remainder of Hemingway chapters ,8,9, 10, Epilogie and Note to Readers\u00a0 Read this recent\u00a0 article about some social science research\u00a0 https:\/\/dailycaller.com\/2022\/11\/06\/robert-epstein-2022-midterm-elections-google-bing\/<\/a><\/p>\r\n

The questions always are: (1) What is misinformation and should something be done if it exists? (2) What are the constitutional limitations on controlling\u00a0 lies and false staatements.\u00a0 These will be big issues in my Civil Liberties class I expect to teach in Spring of 26.<\/p>\r\n

We will also look back at the readings for our first class and see how they now relate to our course materials.\u00a0 What cases have discussions\u00a0 of issues directly raised in these readings\u00a0 or can be related in some ways to these readings?<\/p>\r\n

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\r\n

Class 26 Monday December 2<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n

Disclosure
Read Pp 135-1136<\/p>\r\n

Brief Buckley v Valeo\u00a0 Pp 1136-1145 Understand arguments for and against disclosures\u00a0 Dr. Ssger will brief this case<\/span>
Brief McIntyre v. Ohio Elections<\/span>\u00a0 Pp1145-1161<\/span>\u00a0 Read Note 2 P 1161\u00a0 Dr. Sager will brief this case, one of his favorites.<\/p>\r\n

The New Skepticism
Read Pp 1164-65
Brief\u00a0 Americans for Prosperity v Bonta Pp\u00a0 1166-1188<\/span> Read notes 1,2,4 and 5 Pp 1188-1189
Why might this opinion be so long?\u00a0\u00a0 The secret is out but you probably missed it\u00a0 in a major newspaper.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 27 Wednesday\u00a0 December 4th
<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Exam #3<\/h1>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

All cases and important notes\u00a0 since 2nd exam will be on the in class part of this exam.\u00a0 These begin with bribery cases and go through Americans for Prosperity v Bonta.<\/strong><\/span><\/span> \u00a0 It\u00a0 will also cover articles discussed in class and the oral reargument played in class which can be found on assignments for class 22\u00a0 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 <\/span>Finally exam will cover the last 3 chapters of Rigged\u00a0 (Chapters 8 to 10 and Note To Readers) and movies, <\/span>\u00a0 Our Brand is Crisis\u00a0\u00a0 and\u00a0 \u00a0 The Campaign.\u00a0 There will be no makeups for this exam.\u00a0 Of the 29 or so questions there will be 3 questions\u00a0 on The\u00a0 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\u00a0 be on the exam. \u00a0 <\/span><\/h2>\r\n

Rachel Thompson and I,\u00a0 after much discussion,\u00a0 decided the first\u00a0 essay question will be a take home\u00a0 essay which will be sent out Monday night. That will give you more time to do in class part on Wednesday.\u00a0 Bring your take home essay to\u00a0 class on\u00a0 Wednesday. If you have a different location for taking exam, email your exam to me at my university emal.\u00a0 Please put\u00a0 your name on page 3.\u00a0 You will have maximum of 3 pages,\u00a0 250 words per page, for the take-home.\u00a0 I will discuss it briefly during class 26 tomorrow.
<\/span><\/h2>\r\n

If you are a senior who is graduating in December and will be walking across the stage at graduation,\u00a0 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.\u00a0\u00a0 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\u00a0 the 3rd exam.\u00a0
<\/span><\/h2>\r\n

 <\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Class 28 Monday December 9th<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

This class will take place at Dr. Sager’s home.\u00a0 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.<\/h2>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/h3>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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\u00a0 bring it to class unless you can commit your brief to memory in a way that you can answers questions about it. Other reading […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":443,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":3,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-12","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/443"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12"}],"version-history":[{"count":453,"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":913,"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12\/revisions\/913"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.la.utexas.edu\/lawofpolitics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}