majors versus abell

2009-06-11T03:10:00.001-07:00

test

2008-04-04T23:06:00.000-07:00

this is a just a test to see if having a new post helps the blog show up.. the link wasn't working earlier. http://majors.blogspot.com./

2007-07-31T12:03:00.000-07:00

http://www.projectposner.org/case/2004/361F3d349link to majors III

2005-07-12T21:53:00.000-07:00

Here's a 10th circuit case about door to door vaccuum cleaner sellers, which cites Talley and Watchtower and those lines of case. http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/pdf/04-4010.pdfPacific v Pleasant Grove.

2005-01-16T10:04:00.000-08:00

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/toc.html founder's constitution - has useful links, historical documents. found it here at stetson's civil rights course, which has other useful links too.

2004-12-09T15:29:00.000-08:00

VII. Campaign Finance: The Board will be acting on all outstanding Campaign Finance fines enforced and not enforced. The Board made motions on the following: The 2002 Annual report and 2003 Pre-Primary Reports with fines previously enforced. Chairman Marendt made a motion that the committees listed below will be referred to the Prosecutors Office. Mr. Vane second. Unanimous vote passed. The list

2004-12-09T15:27:00.000-08:00

Mr. Vane made a motion to forgive and waive the remaining balance of Mr. John England’s fine due to his payment of $600 of the $1000 owed. Chairman Marendt second. Unanimous vote passed. http://www6.indygov.org/clerk/election/board/minutes/04-02-25.htm so i saved john $400, but he is stil owed the $600.

2004-12-09T15:20:00.000-08:00

http://www6.indygov.org/clerk/election/board/minutes/04-04-29.htm VIII. Disclaimer Complaint: Bye, Hensley, & Prindle: Attorney Ladendorf stated that these are school board candidates who were not in compliance with the law but have since came into compliance by putting the disclaimer language on their materials. Chairman Marendt stated since they have come into compliance, the Board

2004-09-05T19:50:00.000-07:00

newish blog: one of my clients in majors is perry metzger. found out tonight he has a blog. http://www.piermont.com/blog/ it's pretty good if you like transhumanist extropian memes.

2004-09-03T17:28:00.000-07:00

I spoke to vicky oldenberg at the nevada attorney general's office. They will not be appealing ACLU v Heller. 98% sure. They will plan to revisit the statute, and that concerns me. We had some discussion of ACLF and a recent case about signature petitions by the Nevada supreme court, that I haven't read yet. I mentioned that I want the fines returned. I will need to follow up with some

2004-08-17T11:43:00.000-07:00

i found stewart v taylor. here's a page or so. i'll put the rest in this blog with a date of july 4th, so it's not crowding out the top. see also 934 fsupp2d 1040 United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Robbin STEWART, Plaintiff, v Sarah TAYLOR Plaintiff Robbin Stewart, a Republican candidate for a seat on the Center Township Advisory Board in last November's election

2004-08-16T21:16:00.000-07:00

copyright the sun. do not reproduce further. quoted here under fair use for review purposes. Appeals court strikes down Nevada campaign law By Cy Ryan SUN CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- A federal appeals court Friday struck down a Nevada law that required political pamphlets and campaign publications to contain the names of those who financed them. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court

2004-08-16T21:13:00.000-07:00

Saturday, August 07, 2004Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal APPEALS COURT RULING: Campaign literature law tossed Judges: Statute banning anonymous distribution violates ConstitutionBy ED VOGEL REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU A mailer sent to residents in Clark County Commissioner Lance Malone's district in March 2000 failed to identify the sender. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled

2004-08-16T21:06:00.000-07:00

"Campaign literature law tossed; Judges: Statute banning anonymous distribution violates Constitution." The Las Vegas Review-Journal today contains this report on a decision that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued yesterday. The Las Vegas Sun reports that "Appeals court strikes down Nevada campaign law." And The Associated Press reports that "Court tosses law barring anonymous

2004-08-16T20:23:00.000-07:00

Yet there can be serious consequences for tell-all blogging. Heather Armstrong, 29, learned that the hard way. "I tell people, whoever you think is not going to read your Web site will find your Web site," Armstrong says. "They specifically will find it and read it, and all hell will break loose." from a wapo story about a hill girl who gets wonketted, wound up in playboy with a book deal.

2004-08-16T18:47:00.000-07:00

Gilmore suit goes to 9th circuit, affect of ACLU v. Heller, affect of Majors v. Abell. Finally catching up on Howard's How Appealing, I noticed that John Gilmore's suit, Gilmore v. Ashcroft, has been filed in the 9th circuit. Is it unlawful to require that passengers on commercial airline flights show identification before being allowed to travel? The case of Gilmore v. Ashcroft, which is now

2004-08-16T16:51:00.000-07:00

Here are some quotes from aclu v. heller. I used this tool to convert from pdf to text. http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/access_simple_form.html. Heller-majors The decision in Majors v. Abell (Majors I), 317 F. 3d 719 (7th Cir. 2003), certifying a question to the Indiana Supreme Court is consistent with our analysis. In Majors I, a case in which the state of Indiana advocated a narrowing

2004-08-15T21:43:00.000-07:00

Draft, Nevada softball letter. Kateri Cavin Office of the Attorney General State of Nevada. Dear Ms. Cavin, We talked before, it's probably been several years now, about what the State of Nevada's policies were while we waited for an opinion in ACLU v. Heller, regarding anonymous speech. You were very helpful in sending me the briefs and other filings. It was my position at the time that such

2004-08-15T21:40:00.000-07:00

2 updates. First, ACLU v. Heller. 8/15. I’d missed, until today, Richard Winger’s note 8/9 saying ACLU v. Heller has been decided 8/5/04. I haven’t yet read this month’s copy of ballot access news, which might or might not have broken the story. I’m behind on my reading lately. So I spent this afternoon reading it. It focuses on McIntyre and Majors v. Abell. It is severely critical of Majors, and

2004-08-14T22:03:00.001-07:00

Text of motion to Indiana Supreme Court would go here, when I get around to it.

2004-08-14T22:03:00.000-07:00

Text of motion to Indiana Supreme Court would go here, when I get around to it.

2004-07-23T01:09:00.000-07:00

notes re story below. RIAA. http://www.muddlawoffices.com/laws/RIAA/RIAA.htm legal info http://www.rapnewsdirect.com/News/0-202-257272-00.html mixtape story http://www.sohh.com/thewire/read.php?contentID=5747 Daily Hip-Hop News: Doomed Music Retailer Wants 50 Cent, Eminem Backing Thursday - April 15, 2004 http://www.bet.com/articles/0,,c3gb7659-8496,00.html http://www.boycott-riaa.com/

2004-07-22T11:10:00.000-07:00

Anonymous record bust in indy. Coffee and a bath, feeling rejuvenated. It's a new experience, having to haul the water from the well, heat it over a campfire, and enjoy a quick shallow bath before it cools. I exagerate slightly under the terms of poetic license. I met a guy whose poetic license was suspended - Indiana is tough when it comes to regulation of artistic speech. And that's what this

2004-07-22T10:31:00.000-07:00

So, majors v abell is over, done, lost, so what's to become of this blog? I could delete it, which I won't. I could leave it here as an archive, which might be sensible. Or, and this is where I'm headed, I could get back up on the horse, look around, dust myself off, start all over again. I started this in 1996, won Stewart v. Taylor. I filed majors v. abell in 1998, and lost it 7/9/04, when

2004-07-17T13:59:00.000-07:00

According to the clerk, the cert petition was filed a day late. So that's over. I'm no longer clear on what information I'd been relying on about the date being the 7th rather than the 6th. So that's over, or is it. We'll see. I mean, it's not going to get better, but it could get worse.

2004-07-07T20:34:00.000-07:00

[i don't know how to do that trick where a long post is continued at a link. this is, with some minor changes, the brief as filed, with whatever formatting changes blogger makes.] No. IN THE Supreme Court of the United States _______________________ BRIAN MAJORS, CAROL ANTUN, PERRY METZGER, RICHARD RAY, BILL BRANHAM, JIM RAY, AND BRUCE MARTIN, Plaintiff-petitioners, v. MARSHA ABELL,

2004-07-05T09:53:00.000-07:00

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/033433p.pdfodd posner case on standing, effectively reverses majors. merits have to do with flag burning, a megan lawson. i'll need to contact her. anyway, it gives a cite for majors, 361 F.2d 349 (7th Cir. 2004).

2004-07-04T11:52:00.000-07:00

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Robbin STEWART, Plaintiff, v. Sarah TAYLOR, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Marion County, Indiana, and member of the Marion County Election Board, Richard Milan, member of the Marion County Election Board, John Muller, member of the Marion County Election Board, David Perkins, a member of the Ward 2, Precinct 3 Election Board, in

2004-06-27T23:43:00.000-07:00

update: beginning to panic over getting the brief in timely by next week, i had toyed with the idea of filing for an extension, but missed the 10 day deadline for that. i even had a nifty argument that ashcroft and hiibel called for revision of the brief. but i just need to get it done. i do urgently need a cheap printer for theappendix and brief, one who routinely does s ct briefs so will get

2004-06-26T11:06:00.000-07:00

notes on places to ask for funding: www.pottv.com mark somebody. emersomething. marc emery? trust fund in huntington ny re carol antun georgesoros open society institute. eff/ aclu/ nra/ gun owners/ aclu/ paul grantsmanship. james madison institute/bopp katina%eff.org lee%eff.org leetien cory%eff.org marc%pottv.net steve%kubby.com gnu%toad.com

2004-06-24T13:42:00.000-07:00

the computer says i've already lost. http://wusct.wustl.edu/ via crescat. Forecast Results Variables This forecast was generated from the following variables: Ideological Direction of Lower Court Decision Liberal Circuit: 7th Substantive Issue: First Amendment Type of Petitioner: Politician Type of Respondent: State Forecast: 5 to 4 to Affirm Voting to affirm:

2004-06-24T13:03:00.000-07:00

deadline for filing majors petition for cert is coming up fast, like a steamroller. it's putting me into the panic mode i go into to actually get things done. i was unavoidably detained on another project during may and early june, so crunchtime is here. i just lost another day because a noisy neighbor kept me up all night, and i'm a bit sick too. but after 7 years to get it this far, i can't

2004-04-23T16:01:00.000-07:00

Advertising Disclaimers All printed campaign literature and paid print or television advertisements must include a disclaimer giving the full name, title and address of the person authorizing it, and the name, title and address of the person paying for it if different than the person who authorized it. All paid radio advertisements shall include a disclaimer with the full name and title of the

2004-04-23T15:47:00.000-07:00

a 2001 montana disclaimer complaint.

2004-04-23T15:40:00.000-07:00

wisconsin disclaimer memo. wi pdf

2004-04-23T15:24:00.000-07:00

ky stand by your ad bill. not sure status.

2004-04-23T15:17:00.000-07:00

ky statute

2004-04-23T13:45:00.000-07:00

fec disclaimer link.

2004-04-23T13:26:00.000-07:00

This is the html version of the file http://www.state.mt.us/cpp/content/pdf/5cfp/2003_WBCFPFAQs_Disclaimers_revised10_03.pdf. G o o g l e automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web. To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/unclesam?q=cache:zk_VXgqGTi8J:www.state.mt.us/cpp/content/pdf/5cfp/2003_WBCFPFAQs_Disclaimers_revised10_03.pdf

2004-04-21T16:29:00.000-07:00

spawn oops that's not it.

2004-04-21T16:13:00.000-07:00

link ELECTIONS Majors v. Abell, March 15 Plaintiffs challenged Indiana's attempt at campaign finance reform. J. Posner "cannot say that the net effect of invalidating the Indiana statute would be to promote political speech." -------------------------------------

2004-04-20T12:30:00.000-07:00

rick hasen: April 20, 2004 Petition for Rehearing Denied in Majors v. Abell See here (docket entry for 4/7/04). This is an important case on the constitutionality of campaign finance disclosure laws post-McConnell. The original Seventh Circuit opinion is here. I do not know if the plaintiffs will file a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. in order to file, we need $300 plus cost of

2004-04-11T12:13:00.000-07:00

No. IN THE Supreme Court of the United States [gothic font] _______________________ BRIAN MAJORS, et al., Plaintiff-petitioners, v. MARSHA ABELL, et al., Defendant-respondents. ___________________________________________ On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Robbin Stewart @

2004-04-09T17:42:00.000-07:00

open law: would anyone like to co-write the petition for cert?

2004-03-30T18:24:00.000-08:00

update: denied. on to supreme ct. 04-09-04. i filed the following with the 7th circuit. i'm not claiming it's particularly good; i just wanted to make sure i got something in by the deadline. (what was filed was slightly edited from this version) - MOTION FOR REHEARING BY PANEL Attorney for plaintiffs. Robbin Stewart. #17147-53 227 N. Temple Avenue Indianapolis IN 46201 Table of Contents

2004-03-28T15:59:00.000-08:00

EASTERBROOK , Circuit Judge, dubitante. Four decisions of the Supreme Court hold or strongly imply that the ability to speak anonymously—and thus with less concern for re- percussions—is part of the “freedom of speech” protected by the first amendment against governmental interference. Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960); McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334 (1995); Buckley v.

2004-03-28T15:51:00.000-08:00

majors v. abell - posner 3-15-04 - majority opinion An Indiana statute, challenged in this suit as an infringement of free speech, requires that political advertising that “expressly advocat[es] the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate” contain “a disclaimer that appears and is presented in a clear and conspicuous manner to give the reader or observer adequate notice of the

2004-03-19T08:49:00.000-08:00

Act one, scene one. The curtain rises. The curtain rises on a courtroom setting on the 27th floor of a federal office buillding in downtown chicago. A bailiff announces, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit now in session, the honorable Dick Imposner Presiding. Imposner stands, leans on, a lecturn, stage left. Behind him, mute, not moot, is Judge Bowered. Stage right, seated,

2004-03-17T22:06:00.000-08:00

Up my alley Will Baude at 11:19 AM Libertarians, free speech, Richard Posner, Frank Easterbrook, Indiana, and random legal trivia, all in the same blog post. I wish I had something to add to this, but I don't. Perhaps I will once I read the opinion for myself. The basic argument between Posner and Easterbrook (dubitante) seems to be whether the 7th Circuit's job is to follow the principles of

2004-03-17T12:33:00.000-08:00

more fisking majors - fails to reach and decide brochure issue - to do: separate motions for rehearing by panel. - thrust: - if correct, the opinion denies justice to litigants. Plaintiff has shown his rights were violated by the policy and the brochure. The indiana supreme court narrowed the statute in such a way that major's signs are now legal and protected speech. Any yet you would

2004-03-16T03:42:00.000-08:00

10. It was a straightforward anti-fraud statute unlikely to present serious constitutional problems. This accurately cites the prior opinon's error. 9. Terry, Gable, FEC v. Public Citizen, Seymour, were overruled by Watchtower. 8. "and that only issue referenda were before the court" McInntyre was a facial challenge to a candidate disclaimer statute, so it wrong to say only issue referenda

2004-03-16T02:29:00.000-08:00

to do: list errors in posner decision. dubitante? sermon: ripple effect: the damage from mcconnell isn't so much what it upholds. it is the uncertainty that now clouds the process. a recent case from the 7th circuit illustrates this problem. there'smcconnell, upholding mccain-goldberg. there's the circle created by the new preceent in mcconell. then, as here, there is the circle created by

2004-03-16T02:04:00.000-08:00

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op3.fwx?submit1=showop&caseno=02-2204A.PDF

2004-03-10T17:02:00.000-08:00

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-09-tone-tv-ads_x.htm text 'Tagline' could alter tone of ads By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY "Shut down" is the command computer users see day after day on their screens. It's so common it barely registers. The president's campaign spots include the phrase "I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this message." Bush-Cheney

2004-03-10T11:30:00.000-08:00

Wed Mar 10, 02:11:22 PM | gt bear | edit ] Spoke w Mike Schaefer. The iec will not settle majors v iec. need to update cocounsel and clients. 2:01 pm 3/10. i clipped an article recently about a legislator (mayhern? d?) who is not happy with doris anne sadler - might be worthwhile to touch base w. mike reneged on earlier agreement to file joint motion for summ judgment. he suggests, though,

2004-02-24T22:59:00.000-08:00

http://journalism.medill.northwestern.edu/docket/00-1737leedy.html story about cantwell v connecticut, in light of watchtower.

2004-02-24T22:52:00.000-08:00

watchtower amicus pdf center for individual freedom eric jaffe

2004-02-24T22:26:00.000-08:00

http://www.socialism.com/elections/motion.html freedom socialist party won exemption from disclosure. ky rtl v terry.

2004-02-24T21:09:00.000-08:00

New Hampshire Right to Life Political Action Comm. v. Gardner, 99 F.3d 8, 12 (1st Cir. 1996). Morefield v. Moore, 540 S.W. 2d 873 (Ky. 1976); but see People v. White, 116 Ill. 2d 171, 506 N.E.2d 1284 (1987) ---------end------ 30. See, e.g., Wilson v. Stocker, 819 F.2d 943 (10th Cir. 1987); Wilson v. Stocker, 819 F.2d 943 (10th Cir. 1987): James Wilson was arrested for distributing unsigned

2004-02-24T20:48:00.000-08:00

http://www.fec.gov/members/mason/masonarticle2.htm Anonymity and the Internet: Constitutional Issues in Campaign Finance Regulation Wilson v. Stocker, 819 F.2d 943 (10th Cir. 1987): State v. Moses, 655 So.2d 779 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1995) (first post-McIntyre decision): Napoleon Moses was indicted for violating a Louisiana statute that prohibited the distribution of campaign literature which did

2004-02-24T15:39:00.000-08:00

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g018853.pdf griset rancho http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/g023316.pdf link commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju62492.000/hju62492_0.HTM house testimony. Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-333w Seymour v. Connecticut Elections Enforcement Commission (Connecticut Supreme Court) (amicus): We prepared an amicus brief in

2004-02-24T15:28:00.000-08:00

AZ . Legal Requirements for Candidate Campaign Advertisements, Literature and Signs "Disclosure" means disclosing who paid for the advertisement, literature or signs. For written materials, the disclosure must be printed "clearly and legibly in a conspicuous manner." For broadcast advertisements, the disclosure must be spoken. A.R.S. § 16-912(D). 1. When disclosure is required Campaign

2004-02-24T15:12:00.000-08:00

http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/ Statutes /Title15/Chapter13/Section135.htm Alaska independent expenditures.

2004-02-24T15:07:00.000-08:00

http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/ Statutes/ Title15/Chapter13/Section090.htm AS 15.13.090. Identification of Communication. (a) All communications shall be clearly identified by the words "paid for by" followed by the name and address of the candidate, group, nongroup entity, or individual paying for the communication. In addition, candidates and groups may identify the name of their campaign

2004-02-24T00:18:00.000-08:00

http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/001175.html Prior Prior.

2004-02-24T00:14:00.000-08:00

Ala. Code §§ 17-22A-1 thru 17-22A-23 (Fair Campaign Practices Act) Ala. Const. Art 1, § Ala. Code §§ 17-22A-1 thru 17-22A-23 (Fair Campaign Practices Act) Plaintiff Christian Coalition of Alabama (CCA) was a non-profit, tax-exempt Alabama corporation whose purpose was to educate, inform and mobilize Christians to become active in the public arena in support of causes reflecting Christian

2004-02-24T00:08:00.000-08:00

http://www.sos.state.al.us/election/cfi/glad2002.htm The Fair Campaign Practices Act (FCPA) addresses advertising requirements in three sections of the Code of Alabama, 1975: §17-22A-12. Paid advertisements to be identified as such. Any paid political advertisement appearing in any print media or broadcast on any electronic media shall be clearly identified or marked as a paid advertisement. It

2004-02-24T00:06:00.000-08:00

See Ala. Code §17-22A%13 (Supp. 1994); Alaska Stat. Ann. §15.56.010 (1988); Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §16-912 (Supp. 1994); Ark. Code Ann. §7-1-103 (1993); Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-13-108 (Supp. 1994); Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-333w (Supp. 1994); Del. Code Ann., Tit. 15, §§8021, 8023 (1993); Fla. Stat. §§106.143 and 106.1437 (1992); Ga.Code Ann. §21-2-415 (1993); Haw. Rev. Stat. §11-215 (1988); Idaho Code §67-

2004-02-23T23:51:00.000-08:00

October 29, 2003 GOVERNOR SIGNS LEGISLATION DESIGNATING THE PERRY B. DURYEA, JR. STATE OFFICE BUILDING IN SUFFOLK COUNTY Building Named After Renowned Former Assembly Speaker From Suffolk County Governor George E. Pataki today joined State and local officials at a ceremony officially designating the Perry B. Duryea, Jr. State Office Building on Veterans Memorial Highway in the Town of Islip,

2004-02-19T01:14:00.000-08:00

Oral argument and briefs in majors. http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/farg/arg.fwx?caseno=02-2204&submit=showdkt&yr=02&num=2204 decision (pdf) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/022204p.pdf http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/briefs.htm 02-2204 : Majors, Brian v. Foster, Mark Case Type: Civil ; Nature of Suit: Const Of State Statutes-fedque File Name Doc Uploaded Filed Description 02-

2004-02-19T01:06:00.000-08:00

FindLaw: STEWART v TAYLOR http://laws.findlaw.com/7th/963108.html

2004-02-19T01:01:00.000-08:00

http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/index.html#statelaw Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York

2004-02-19T00:59:00.000-08:00

1st - ME, MA, NH, PR, RI 2nd - NY, VT, CT 3rd - PA, NJ, DE, VI 4th - MD, NC, SC, VA, WV 5th - LA, TX, MS 6th - MI, OH, KY TN 7th - IL, IN, WI 8th - ND, SD, MN, NE, IA, MO AR 9th - CA, OR, WA, AZ, MT, ID, NV, AK, HI 10th - CO, KS, NM, OK, UT, WY 11th - AL, GA, FL DC - DC, Tax Court, fed admin agencies. Federal Patent, Int'l Trade, Claims Court and Veterans' Appeals.

2004-02-19T00:53:00.000-08:00

Stewart v. Taylor, 934 F. Supp. 1040, 1041 (S. D. Ind. 1996) look it up (superceded by 7th cir but still.)

2004-02-18T10:13:00.000-08:00

Mo Libertarian Party v. Conger Here's the entire opinion. It effectively repeals the Missouri Constitution. It misstates the standard of review. It misstates the constitutional provision in question. On the other hand, it does not seem as though plaintiffs did a good job. They fail to cite the relevant state constitutional provision, except section 8, they bring a case which is a loser under the

2004-02-15T21:51:00.000-08:00

Ballot Access News coverage 4. Indiana: on January 23, the 7th circuit revived a lawsuit against the state's ban on anonymous campaign literature (the U.S. District Court had dismissed it), and sent it to the State Supreme Court to see if the law applies just to candidates, or to all individuals. Majors v Abell, 02-2204. If the State Court says it applies to everyone, it will probably then be

2004-02-15T16:45:00.000-08:00

docket entries at ind sup ct

2004-02-15T15:01:00.000-08:00

Cases citing majors v abell 317 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 2003)(Posner,J): cal. pro-life v. getman As the Seventh Circuit recently observed in a context very similar to this case: A plaintiff who mounts a pre-enforcement challenge to a statute that he claims violates his freedom of speech need not show that the authorities have threatened to prosecute him; the threat is latent in the existence of the

2004-02-15T14:41:00.000-08:00

5:33 pm. blog clock not set to my time, keep in mind for billing records

2004-02-15T14:17:00.000-08:00

notes from hynes v. city of oradell HYNES v. MAYOR OF ORADELL, 425 U.S. 610 (1976) http://laws.findlaw.com/us/425/610.html Regulation in this area "must be done, and the restriction applied, in such a manner as not to intrude upon the rights of free speech and free assembly," Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516, 540 -541 (1945). Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938), NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415

2004-02-15T14:08:00.000-08:00

did: added links to cases. mcintyre etc.

2004-02-15T13:28:00.000-08:00

to do: add links to cases. mcintyre etc.

2004-02-13T11:00:00.000-08:00

To do: make list of where else to sue/negotiate. Get the old project going again. To do: write memo on errors in the state supreme court ruling in Majors. Re-read my response brief. Track false statements from the amicus brief that made it into the opinion. To do: find brian majors. prepare 2003 status report. scalia's infamous footnote 2. See Ala. Code 17-22A-13 (Supp. 1994); Alaska

2004-02-13T10:55:00.000-08:00

As expected, motion to strike denied.

2004-01-28T12:22:00.000-08:00

found: oral argument at 7th cir. in majors.

2004-01-27T06:59:00.000-08:00

I filed the motion to strike yesterday. I also found out that Majors v Abell (I) was reprinted in full in the summer 2003 election law journal.

2004-01-19T12:57:00.000-08:00

. Stewart v. Taylor, 96-3108, 01/15/97, 104 F3d 965 Stewart v. Taylor 953 F. Supp. 1047 (SD Ind. 1997)

2004-01-16T19:13:00.000-08:00

1/16/04 7:49 PM 1 hour reading state memorandum. 1/16/04 9:23 PM finished draft of motion to strike. Off to research issue preclusion. Caption @draft only@ research issue preclusion. MOTION TO STRIKE The State defendants’ memorandum, offered for filing 1/13/2004, Part A, discusses McConnell, as requested by the court and, while erroneous, is on topic. The State then goes on in Part B, to argue

2004-01-16T19:12:00.000-08:00

I ended up not using the exact quotes below in my brief to the 7th circuit, but they influenced what i did end up writing. The next post above is a draft of a motion to strike part of the state's memo on McConnell. The state did not provide an electronic copy of its memo.

2004-01-02T23:42:00.000-08:00

A 7 member majority joins Chief Justice Rehnquist in finding that the court lacks jurisdiction to rule on FECA 318, the disclaimer regulation similar to that at issue in majors. BRCA 311 is upheld only against a narrow attack limited to an express advocacy argument. Therefor it cannot be said that McConnell overrules McIntyre. When the day comes to rule on FECA 318, stare decisis may govern. But

2004-01-02T23:36:00.000-08:00

Seven of Nine. I and II Stevens, O'Connor joined by Souter Ginsburg Breyer. III and IV Rehnquist, C.J. joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Souter. Stevens, Breyer, and Thomas each joined parts of this opinion. As to 311, The Chief is joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Stevens, and Breyer, seven of nine. V Breyer, and Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, O'Connor. Dissents: Rehnquist, Scalia,

2004-01-02T23:23:00.000-08:00

As to the disclosure requirements involving “any political matter of national importance” under the new Communications Act §315(e)(1)(B), the Government suggests that the disclosure enables viewers to evaluate the message transmitted.6 First, insofar as BCRA §504 requires reporting of “request[s for] broadcast time” as well as actual broadcasts, it is not supported by this goal. Requests that

2004-01-02T23:20:00.000-08:00

For sure, national political party committees exist in large part to elect federal candidates, but as a majority of the District Court found, they also promote coordinated political messages and participate in public policy debates unrelated to federal elections, promote, even in off-year elections, state and local candidates and seek to influence policy at those levels, and increase public

2004-01-02T22:53:00.000-08:00

Nevertheless, I would entertain plaintiffs’ challenge to §305 on the merits and uphold the section. Like BCRA §§201, 212, and 311, §305 serves an important–and constitutionally sufficient–informational purpose. Moreover, §305’s disclosure requirements largely overlap those of §311, and plaintiffs identify no reason why any candidate already in compliance with §311 will be harmed by the

2004-01-02T22:34:00.000-08:00

The dissents by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas make clear that there is opposition to further intrusions into campaign speech. This is a sad day for the freedom of speech. ....would smile with favor upon a law that cuts to the heart of what the First Amendment is meant to protect: the right to criticize the government. - Scalia. The First Amendment provides that "

2004-01-02T22:27:00.000-08:00

The McConnell plaintiffs, inclusive of the consolidated cases, include those associated with Brian Majors through the Libertarian Party, which is itself a plaintiff, as it was in Valeo. 1:01 am 01/03/04. Plaintiff Ron Paul is a former Libertarian candidate for president. His co-plaintiffs Michael Cloud and Carla Howell have run for office in Massachusetts. Howell got 12% of the vote for

2004-01-02T22:00:00.000-08:00

Together with No. 02-1675, National Rifle Association et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al., No. 02-1676, Federal Election Commission et al. v. McConnell, United States Senator, et al., No. 02-1702, McCain, United States Senator, et al. v. McConnell, United States Senator, et al., No. 02-1727, Republican National Committee et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al., No. 02-1733, National

2004-01-02T21:59:00.000-08:00

District Court's decision upholding BCRA Â§311's expansion of FECA Â§318(a) to include mandatory electioneering-communications-disbursements disclosure is affirmed because such inclusion bears a sufficient relationship to the important governmental interest of "shed[ding] the light of publicity" on campaign financing, Buckley, 424 U. S., at 81. Assuming, as the Court must, that FECA Â§318 is

2004-01-02T08:16:00.000-08:00

roughest notes on mcconnell brief: BRIEF ON MCCONNELL V. FEC The court, by order of 12/15/2003, has requested that the parties brief how and whether McConnell v. FEC affects this litigation. McConnell was heard by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory jurisdiction for expedited review of the three-judge court’s voluminous opinion. The limited jurisdiction of the court turns out to be key

2003-11-15T06:54:00.000-08:00

stand by your ad letters: wapo and nyt have articles on stand by your ad, section 311 of bcra. posted here while i work on a letter in response; do not distribute further without approval. washingtonpost.com Stating Obvious Could Limit Negative Ads By LIZ SIDOTI The Associated Press Thursday, November 13, 2003; 5:17 PM WASHINGTON - The simple sentence in this year's political ads elicits