Here.

Iowa Senate Majority leader, Mike Gronstal, won’t allow voter ID legislation to move forward for a vote in the closely divided Iowa Senate.  Full story here. 

Here is the motion seeking class certification in the case Davis v. Guam, et al, which was filed today.  The plaintiff alleges multiple causes of action, including violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, violations of 42 U.S.C. 1971, and the Organic Act of Guam.  The plaintiff is a retired Air Force Major who was not permitted to register to vote for a status plebiscite in Guam because he is not a native inhabitant, in effect, not of the Chamorro race.  The motion for class status would create a plaintiff class that includes all non-Chamorros who are prohibited from registering to vote in the election that are otherwise eligible voters on Guam, including blacks, Koreans, whites and Filipinos.  I am representing the plaintiff along with Michael Rosman of the Center for Individual Rights and Mun Su Park of Guam.

If you want to see an illustrative example of Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer making decisions based on their personal ideologies and political opinions—as opposed to the actual evidence submitted in the cases before them—look no further than an order issued February 17 in American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock.

…What evidence is there before Justices Ginsburg and Breyer that the allegiance of candidates is being bought? The misinformed editorial pages of The New York Times? The propaganda spewed by MSNBC about Citizens United? And what evidence is there of “corruption” by corporations because of independent expenditures? There is none.

And why is there no mention whatsoever of spending by labor unions, which tend to spend much larger sums than for-profit corporations?

We have seen an uptick in the amount of robust political speech since the Citizens United decision, but apparently the justices believe that more political speech amounts to “corruption.” They see no problem in crippling First Amendment rights and limiting political speech. They apparently believe that protected political activity should be curtailed because it supposedly “buys” the allegiance of candidates.

This week Powerline analyzed the opposition to photo ID in Minnesota – worthy of a Sunday post.  First, the blog provides the language of the constitutional amendment question that may be considered, if approved by the Legislature:

Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended effective June 30, 2014, to
require that all in-person voters present an approved form of
government-issued photographic identification at the time of voting;
that those not voting in person provide government-issued proof of
identity at the time of voting; that all voters be subject to
substantially equivalent eligibility verification before a ballot is
cast or accepted; and that the state provide at no charge an approved
photographic identification for voters?

Second, this comment describes the hysteria on the left:

As you can imagine, liberals are up in arms at the prospect that their
voter slush fund–a few extra votes every election, in case they need
them–may dry up. So they have launched a campaign of deception against
the amendment, fronted by the League of Women Voters–a once-respectable
organization that perfectly illustrates O’Sullivan’s Law. As usual, Minnesota Majority,
an excellent grass-roots organization headed, as you might expect, by a
friend of mine, is on the case. Minnesota Majority has set up a web
site called We Want Voter ID,
which currently features a video of a League of Women Voters-sponsored
meeting in Edina, Minnesota. The League spreads disinformation, but a
lot of the citizens present at the meeting are on to them. The video
begins with an ACLU lawyer objecting to being videoed. Why, exactly, is
the ACLU teaming up with the League on this issue? Because voting
whether you are legal or not is a “right,” but having your vote canceled out by an illegal voter isn’t a “right.”

A video debate between Lucky Rosenbloom and others regarding voter ID in Minnesota. 

It took the state Supreme Court less than four hours Friday to decide
that Kentucky’s redrawn legislative districts are unconstitutional,
ruling that this year’s elections for the General Assembly must be run
in the old district boundaries.The ruling
was a victory for House Republicans and one Senate Democrat, who filed
suit to challenge the plans contained in House Bill 1. They claimed the
plans violated state constitutional guidelines.

full story here.

 The Voting Rights Act is outmoded, unworkable

Concerned about the increasing number of absentee voters in Missoula
County – and the potential for fraud, a dozen citizens came to the
Missoula County Elections Office on Friday demanding access to voter
records.

The group, led by Missoula accountant Patty Lovaas,
believes there should be greater scrutiny over the process that allows
voters to receive ballots by mail. Lovaas and her group want to conduct
their own assessment, arguing that absentee ballots have the highest
risk of manipulation.

Lovaas confronted elections administrator Vickie Zeier and Deputy County Attorney Dori Brownlow about opening their records.

Poor old Harold Camping finally has some company.  Camping is
the doomsday prophet who repeatedly predicted the end of the world.
First, we were all doomed in 1994. Then we were all doomed in May of
2011. Then, we all were doomed last Oct. 21.

…Camping is not a Wisconsinite. But there were plenty of other Chicken
Littles here who claimed the advent of Voter ID would be the end of life
as we know it. Opponents — some of whom have sued — say they are
“appalled” at how hard it is to get an acceptable ID, call the
requirement to produce an ID a “poll tax,” “voter suppression,” a return
to “Jim Crow,” shameful, and an attempt to let only a “select club”
vote. In sum, the sky is falling.

Read it all.