The Law and Politics Blog

Jesse "The Senator" Ventura?

2008-07-09T13:27:00.004-05:00

In multiple interviews today, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura hinted that he is considering joining the state's 2008 U.S. Senate race.

NPR, the AP, the Politico, the New York Times all have reports on his possible candidacy against Norm Coleman and Al Franken.

A recent poll shows Ventura would draw support from Franken, Coleman, and undecideds. Without Ventura, Coleman leads Franken 52-40. With Ventura, Coleman polls at 41%, Franken at 31%, and Ventura at 23%.

Then again, when Ventura was elected Governor in 1998, he was also polling in third.

What do you think? Should he do it? Can he win?

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

General Election Fundraising Landscape

2008-06-08T21:06:00.007-05:00

With the general election campaign about to begin in full force, presumptive nominees Barack Obama (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ), as well as their respective parties, are gearing up for a highly-competitive campaign. As reported in the Washington Post, each candidate seeks to expand the electoral map and use his appeal to independent voters to compete in states that would otherwise not be competitive.

Both candidates acknowledge that fundraising will play a critical role determining their success in the fall, and by all accounts, the candidates will set records bringing in funds for their campaign war chests. Senator McCain raised a record $21.5 million in May, the largest one-month total over the course of his campaign. Not to be outdone, Senator Obama raised about $31 million in April (the campaign hasn't yet released its May fundraising numbers), and had nearly $37.3 million cash on hand.

The spike in fundraising has its downsides for each candidate, however. For McCain, fundraising involves occasional events with the incredibly unpopular President Bush; one recent McCain fundraiser featuring the President was closed to the media likely for this very reason. For Obama, whose ability to raise tens of millions of dollars over the internet through largely small donations allowed him to set up campaign operations in all fifty states, the general election campaign brings the risk of breaking a previous pledge to accept public financing, should he decide to keep tapping these donors as most pundits expect him to. On the other hand, the presumptive Democratic nominee has started to exert his authority as nominee over the Democratic National Committee by refusing to accept contributions from registered lobbyists or Political Action Committees.

Adding to the complexity of the fundraising landscape is each party's effort to raise tens of millions of dollars for the national party conventions in Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul this fall. Unlike the candidates, who have foregone accepting soft money, the conventions are raking it in, according to the New York Times. How will the candidates' and the parties' fundraising efforts play out? Is the ever-increasing presence of campaign spending a good thing? Post in the comments section below.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Shakeups Continue in Minnesota Attorney General's Office

2008-05-28T14:09:00.005-05:00

After nearly a year and a half in office, Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson's office continues to be plagued by staff dissension.

The Star Tribune reports that an independent investigation of the office by St. Thomas Law Dean Thomas Mengler cleared the Attorney General of wrongdoing related to her handling of cases in the office. In response to the investigation report, Attorney General Swanson fired the attorney who brought the original complaint.

"Mengler said Swanson did not ask him to address broader concerns raised by [the fired attorney] on office morale and attempts by staff attorneys in the attorney general's office to form a union...

Mengler's 19-page report comes as the legislative auditor is conducting a separate probe into the attorney general's office."

At the same time, local online newspaper, MinnPost, has published a critique of the Attorney General's Office and lays the blame for any mismanagement there at the feet of former Attorney General Mike Hatch.

"The recent agonies of the Minnesota attorney general's office under Lori Swanson (an alarming turnover rate in the office, a futile unionization effort blocked by Swanson, a series of allegations that lawyers in the office felt pressured to do things they considered unethical and a preliminary investigation by the legislative auditor, which may be released any day now) are really the latest symptoms of trauma that goes back nine years and starts with two words:

Mike Hatch.

One former assistant attorney general said that when people ask him what he thinks about the turmoil of Swanson's first year, he replies: 'Are you kidding me? None of this is new. All of this has been happening since Hatch took over...'

[Hatch] defends his management of the office and blames the current controversies on a 'small cabal of attorneys' who are trying to unionize the office. He said they hide behind anonymity to throw mud at their bosses and look 'for any scribner to serve as their hand maiden.'"

To what degree do internal staff frustrations impact the operations of the Attorney General's Office and its service to the State of Minnesota?

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

US Supreme Court Upholds Voter ID Requirement

2008-04-28T13:40:00.002-05:00

This morning the United States Supreme Court released its decision in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (pdf). This case sought to determine whether the State of Indiana's voter identification requirement violated the constitutional rights of voters.

In its plurality-decision today, the Court upheld the voter identification requirement in Indiana, ruling that states only need a rational justification for implementing new voting requirements.

Institute for Law and Politics Advisory Board Member Rick Hasen has a more detailed analysis on his Election Law Blog.

Do you think today's Court ruling will encourage additional states to pass stricter voting requirements?

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Monday, April 28: Professor Patrick Garry to Lead Lunch Discussion on Judicial Decisionmaking

2008-04-11T14:31:00.000-05:00

On Monday, April 28, University of South Dakota Law Professor Patrick Garry will lead a discussion on his new book, "An Entrenched Legacy: How the New Deal Constitutional Revolution Continues to Shape the Role of the Supreme Court."

From Amazon:

"An Entrenched Legacy takes a fresh look at the role of the Supreme Court in our modern constitutional system. Although criticisms of judicial power today often attribute its rise to the activism of justices seeking to advance particular political ideologies, Patrick Garry argues instead that the Supreme Court's power has grown mainly because of certain constitutional decisions during the New Deal era that initially seemed to portend a lessening of the Court's power."

This event is part of the Institute for Law and Politics' regular Lunch Discussion Series.

The lunch will be from 12:15pm - 1:15pm at the University of Minnesota Law School. (Click here for parking and directions).

The discussion is free and open to the public. Lunch is provided.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Thursday, April 24: Governor Al Quie and Representative Steve Simon to Discuss Judicial Selection in Minnesota

2008-04-11T14:29:00.001-05:00

On Thursday, April 24, Former Minnesota Governor Al Quie (R) and Minnesota State Representative Steve Simon (DFL) will discuss possible reforms to Minnesota's judicial selection system.

Governor Quie recently chaired a state commission to study possible reforms to Minnesota's system. A copy of the commission's report is available online.

This event is part of the Institute for Law and Politics' regular Lunch Discussion Series. It is co-sponsored by the Law School Democrats and Minnesotans for Impartial Courts.

The lunch will be from 12:15pm - 1:30pm in Spannaus Commons at the University of Minnesota Law School. (Click here for parking and directions).

The discussion is free and open to the public. Lunch is provided.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Monday, April 28: Professor Marc-Olivier Baruch to Discuss the Implementation of Anti-Semitic Legislation in France in 1940-44

2008-04-09T11:16:00.003-05:00

On Monday, April 28, Professor Marc-Olivier Baruch, Professor and Director of Studies, Center of Historical Research, L'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociale, CNRS, will lead a discussion on the implementation of anti-Semitic legislation in France in 1940-44.

Professor Baruch is a French historian; in addition to his work as a scholar writing books and articles, Professor Baruch testified at the war crimes trial of Maurice Papon.

This event is co-sponsored by the Institute for Law and Rationality and the Program in Law and History.

The event will be at 3:30pm in Room 348 of the University of Minnesota Law School. (Click here for parking and directions).

The discussion is free and open to the public. A reception will follow the talk.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Klobuchar Endorses Obama

2008-03-31T07:40:00.004-05:00

The latest news from the Wall Street Journal and the Star Tribune indicates that freshman Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) endorsed presidential candidate Barack Obama last night.

"My endorsement reflects both Barack's strong support in my state and my own independent judgment about his abilities," explained Klobuchar, likening the Illinois Democrat to Minnesota's first Vice President, Hubert Humphrey.

According to the New York Times superdelegate tracker, the senator's endorsement of Obama leaves only two Minnesota superdelegates uncommitted: Collin Peterson, the representative from the state's 7th Congressional district; and Nancy Larson, a state party official.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Will Protracted Nomination Fight Help or Hurt Democrats?

2008-03-26T15:02:00.002-05:00

Common political wisdom in recent weeks, as exemplified by this report in the New York Times, is that a protracted nomination fight could spoil the best chance Democrats have in recent years of reclaiming the White House. With an unpopular president and a struggling economy, Democratic candidates Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) argue that they have a unique opportunity to claim the mantle of change and sail to victory. However, with neither likely to gain the nomination without the help of so-called superdelegates, neither appears likely to concede to the other any time soon. The result, many in the Democratic Party fear, is that they will tear each other down and hurt each other's chances at winning the presidency.

However, as a recent analysis in the Washington Post suggests, there may be a flip side to a protracted nomination fight: increased voter registration and interest. While Democrats participating in early contests outnumbered republicans by nearly 2 to 1 in states like Iowa, they are gaining an even greater advantage in registered voters in more recent states like Pennsylvania, where Republicans have no meaningful contest, with presumptive nominee John McCain (R-AZ) having already secured the delegates necessary to win the nomination.

Will a protracted nomination fight help or hurt Democrats? Post in the comments section below.
Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

What Could Go Wrong in Florida?

2008-03-13T14:22:00.005-05:00

Institute for Law and Politics Advisory Board Member Rick Hasen predicts in his Election Law Blog three potential problems if Florida goes forward with a June Mail-Vote Primary:

1. An Election Meltdown
As I have noted,"there's something especially worrisome about rolling out a new system for counting votes for the first time in a presidential contest. It is like debuting your new play straight on Broadway." Dan Tokaji has raised similar and additional administrability concerns. A meltdown could well backfire on the Democrats, making Floridians less likely to vote for a Democrat in the fall, and tarnishing even further the reputation of Florida.

2. The Specter of Vote Fraud
Any time voting takes place outside the voting booth, there is the chance of a vote buying arrangement. As I have explained, absentee ballot fraud was rampant enough for a court to void the Miami mayor's race of 1997. We can also expect that the loser of the contest will have an incentive to claim fraud as a way of trying to undermine the results, much like what may be happening with the Texas caucus right now.

3. Undermining the Ability of the DNC to Insure Order on the Primary Process
It would be quite ironic if Florida, despite having broken the rules, would get to hold a final primary that the media (and perhaps the candidates) will bill as the decisive contest to sway the superdelegates (as in, whoever can win in Florida deserves to take on John McCain in November). What incentive will this create for states in 2012 asked to abide by the Democratic party rules for the timing of primaries and caucuses?

What do you think the odds are of one or more of these problems arising if Florida Democrats go forward with their plan?

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Florida Democratic Party Proposes June 3 Mail Vote Primary

2008-03-12T22:11:00.003-05:00

Politico reports that the Florida Democratic Party has developed a plan to redo its Primary election through a June 3 Mail Ballot.

No word yet from either Clinton or Obama on their reactions to the proposal. The re-vote election is estimated to cost between $10-$12 million, though right now, no one has volunteered to pay for it.

The plan reads in part:

" With the oversight of the commission, the primary will be managed by reputable election management companies who are experienced in special elections. A recognized accounting firm will provide further assurance that the process is conducted fairly and accurately. Civil rights and election law attorneys will monitor all legal aspects of the primary.

The primary will be organized at a Florida Democratic Primary Headquarters (HQ) office in Central Florida. The 50 REOs will handle local outreach and educational activity, with specific consideration given to disadvantaged communities.

Vote-by-mail (VBM) packets will be mailed to all registered Democratic voters at least two weeks prior to Election Day (likely earlier). This will be handled by a firm experienced in special elections conducted by mail. VBM packets will contain a prepaid, addressed return envelope and one ballot. The instructions will be simple and clearly printed on the ballot and envelope. All ballots and instructions will be printed in English, Spanish and Creole to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The plan can be submitted to the Justice Department for approval under Section 5.

Although VBM packets will not be forwarded, when a ballot is returned as undeliverable, a notification card will be sent to the voter’s forwarding address offering the voter the opportunity to correct their registration record and receive a new VBM packet in time for the election. The undeliverable ballots also will be recorded and stored until 21 days after the voting deadline.

If a voter does not receive a ballot or whose ballot has been damaged/lost, he or she may contact HQ or an REO to request a replacement. A voter may cast an in-person provisional ballot at a regional office if their voting eligibility cannot be confirmed.
REOs will be open every day for the two weeks leading up to the voting deadline for informational purposes, distribution of replacement ballots, in-person voting, and collection of completed ballots. REOs will have a locked ballot box and will be staffed, but votes will only be counted at HQ. Every evening, the day’s ballot box will be picked up from the REOs and transported to HQ. All ballots must be received by 7:00 PM on Election Day to count."

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

The Myth of Voter Fraud?

2008-03-10T11:04:00.007-05:00

Institute for Law and Politics Senior Fellow David Schultz recently published a law review article titled, "Less Than Fundamental: The Myth of Voter Fraud and the Coming of the Second Great Disenfranchisement (PDF)"

In the article, Professor Schultz essentially makes two arguments. First, he argues that claims of widespread intentional voter fraud are exaggerated and that there is little evidence of it at all.

Professor Schultz further argues that policy reactions to these exaggerated claims of voter fraud, such as stricter voter registration laws, are likely to lead to the disenfranchisement of some voters, despite the lack of evidence that there is a problem with our elections in the first place.

Check out the article, then let us know what you think. Are claims of voter fraud overblown? Are stricter voting requirements appropriate?

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Presidential Candidate Campaign Obstacles

2008-02-25T08:10:00.004-06:00

Now that there's a mini-lull in the presidential campaign schedule, here is some information on the obstacles facing each of the remaining presidential candidates:

For Senator John McCain (R-AZ), the presumptive Republican nominee, there is a concern that his prior entry into the Federal Election Commission's (FEC) public financing system, and the FEC chairman's recent letter suggesting McCain will not be able to withdraw from such a system, will hamstring his campaign before he officially accepts the Republican nomination in Minneapolis-St. Paul in September. Of particular interest is the irony that the very system McCain helped create may well limit his ability to compete with financial juggernauts, Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) or Hillary Clinton (D-NY). This, of course, is in addition to the recent, oft-criticized reports, that McCain engaged in an improper relationship with a female lobbyist during his 2000 presidential campaign.

Before Senator Clinton even worries about facing McCain, however, she needs to combat the perception that her campaign is losing momentum, or as the New York Times reports, that her political horizon "darkens." As of Monday, February 25, Clinton has lost eleven straight nominating contests to Obama, and her campaign acknowledges that she must win delegate-rich Texas and Ohio to remain competitive.

Senator Obama faces obstacles on several fronts, including Republican accusations that he lacks patriotism, Senator Clinton's suggestions that Obama has flip-flopped on his stance on union involvement in this campaign, and even the concern that perennial presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who recently announced he will again seek the presidency, will siphon votes from Obama. Finally, those comparing Obama to inspirational politicians of the 1960s fear that his candidacy threatens his life.

It will be an interesting 9-10 days to see which of these obstacles proves lasting and which fades with the passage of time.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

It's Our Party (we should be allowed to vote if we want to)

2008-02-13T15:12:00.003-06:00

[Senior Fellow David Schultz asked me to submit this post on his behalf]

Imagine the Minnesota DFL Party adopting a rule that no people of color could participate in their caucuses, or the Republican Party adopting one barring women from attending. Could they do that? Proponents of the political parties seem to imply such a right when arguing against a law calling for primaries instead of caucuses for the selection of presidential and other candidates. While the courts have given broad deference to the First Amendment freedom of association rights of political parties, those rights are limited.

There is no question that political parties should generally be free to determine who can be a member and how they select their candidates. Over the last 20 years the Supreme Court has ruled that parties are free to associate with whomever they wish. This means, for example, that the Republican Party of Connecticut could invite independents to participate in their primaries even though a state law prohibited it. Conversely, the Court also voided a California law permitting voters in primaries to select candidates in any party, citing the right of political parties to limit who can participate in their selection. Paraphrasing the Leslie Gore song, the reason for these decisions is that “It’s my party and I’ll invite whom I want to.”

While these cases significantly protect party rights, the Supreme Court has never held that they are free to discriminate. In a series of decisions from the 1930s through the 1950s known as the “White Primary” cases, the Court struck down as unconstitutional party rules that excluded African-Americans from participating in the Texas Democratic Party primaries. The Court ruled that primaries are not always private affairs immune from regulation. The government had an interest in ensuring political parties were free from discrimination, especially when their actions—such as the selection of candidates—would appear on the general election ballot. To say that individuals have a right to vote but to deny them the right to participate in party affairs effectively undermines that right. The courts have also endorsed rules limiting party access to the ballot, and the Supreme Court upheld a Minnesota law preventing one party from cross-endorsing candidates from another.

What became clear on caucus night in Minnesota is how exclusionary and discriminatory the process is. While there was no official policy stating that neither women nor African-Americans could participate, many people were disenfranchised. They included those who worked second shifts or who were working second jobs, the elderly afraid to go out at night, parents with child-rearing duties, and others, such as those serving in the military in places like Iraq. None of them could participate via an absentee ballot, as would be the case in a general election. While the discrimination that occurred might not rise to the level of that found in the White Primary cases, it was nonetheless no less exclusionary and limited in whom it effectively allowed to participate.

The caucus system does promote important values. It encourages deliberation and opens up the parties to many who can suggest issues for it consider. But these values must be balanced against those favoring convenience and greater opportunity for more individuals to participate. Perhaps a hybrid system of all-day voting, absentee ballots, and caucuses at the end of the day can harmonize these competing objectives.

Minnesota prides itself on its high voter turnout. Unfortunately a record-setting caucus turnout of 10% of the voting population is dismal. Such a rate were it to occur in the south with its high minority populations, would be viewed with skepticism. The caucus system, while quaint, is a product of a Lake Wobegon era of Minnesota that is passing away and it may no longer be the most inclusive means of selecting candidates in the 21st century.

David Schultz is a Hamline University Professor in the Graduate School of Management where he teaches classes in government ethics, and at the University of Minnesota in the Law School where he teaches election law and serves as a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Law and Politics.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Obama v. Clinton: Could Delegate Counts Spark a Lawsuit?

2008-02-11T12:00:00.000-06:00

Former U.S. Solicitor General and Bush v. Gore counsel, Ted Olson, writes in today's Wall Street Journal of the possibility of contentious litigation should there be a contest in seating delegates to the Democratic National Convention:

"Imagine that as the convention approaches, Sen. Clinton is leading in the popular vote, but Sen. Obama has the delegate lead. Surely no one familiar with her history would doubt that her take-no-prisoners campaign team would do whatever it took to capture the nomination, including all manner of challenges to Obama delegates and tidal waves of litigation.

"Indeed, it has already been reported that Sen. Clinton will demand that the convention seat delegates from Michigan and Florida, two states whose delegates have been disqualified by the party for holding January primaries in defiance of party rules. The candidates agreed not to campaign in those states. But Sen. Clinton opted to keep her name on the Michigan primary ballot, and staged a primary-day victory visit to Florida, winning both of those unsanctioned primaries. Her campaign is arguing that the delegates she won in each state be recognized despite party rules and notwithstanding her commitment not to compete in those primaries. Of course. 'Count every vote.'

"As the convention nears, with Sen. Clinton trailing slightly in the delegate count, the next step might well be a suit in the Florida courts challenging her party's refusal to seat Florida's delegation at the convention. And the Florida courts, as they did twice in 2000, might find some ostensible legal basis for overturning the pre-election rules and order the party to recognize the Clinton Florida delegates. That might tip the balance to Sen. Clinton..."

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Check Out Hillary's New Victory Speech Game

2008-02-07T10:31:00.000-06:00

Stephen Colbert at The Colbert Report introduces us to Hillary's new dance and tells us that Garrison Keillor is the "whitest man alive". Check out the video here:

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Where Do Democrats Go From Here?

2008-02-06T13:06:00.000-06:00

There is likely to be a protracted battle for Delegates to the Democratic National Convention unseen in generations.

With Obama and Hillary very near each other in Delegate counts after Super Tuesday (Hillary: ~845, Obama: ~765) and neither anywhere near the 2,025 needed to win the nomination, this contest could go on for weeks (if not months).

Politico has an overview of some of the strategy going into the next phase of the Democratic Presidential nomination campaign.

Then there's the nightmare scenario: a Convention so close that the DNC Credentials Committee would have to determine whether or not Florida and Michigan get to seat their delegates and determine the winner.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

The Free Market Predicts Obama Will Win California Tomorrow

2008-02-04T14:42:00.000-06:00

Two electronic predictive markets that offer trades on the Democratic Presidential Primary in California tomorrow both predict wins for Barack Obama.

InTrade Prediction Markets, trading real money, is currently trading a Barack Obama win in California at 57.6, with Hillary trading at 30.5.

The National Journal Political Stock Exchange, a free site, is currently trading a Barack Obama win in California at 58.0, with Hillary trading at 38.0.

Though these same markets failed to predict Hillary's Primary win in New Hampshire, they have otherwise often proved to be fairly accurate.

These websites allow users to buy and sell shares in predicting political outcomes. For any given race, a correct outcome is worth $1.00 per share. Leading up to the outcome, you can buy our sell predictions on which candidate will win, with the price of that share representing the marketplace's view on the likelihood of that outcome. For instance, if you were to say that there is an equal likelihood of the Democrat or Republican winning in a particular race, each candidate's share should trade for $0.50. If a particular candidate is more likely to win, their share will trade closer to the full dollar.

In my book, it's still too close to call.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

John McCain Will Be The Republican Nominee

2008-01-29T20:55:00.000-06:00

John McCain tonight won the Florida Primary.

It is also being reported that with Rudy Giuliani's disappointing third-place finish in Florida, that tomorrow he will likely drop out of the race and endorse Senator McCain.

McCain and Giuliani already lead in most February 5 Super Tuesday states.

With a Giuliani endorsement, John McCain will almost certainly win a majority of those big, delegate-rich states, propelling him to the Republican nomination.

Even if media reports are wrong about Giuliani's announcement for tomorrow, McCain is clearly the GOP front-runner, with all the momentum, and the support of both establishment Party leaders and Independents.

We're now facing a situation that pundits did not predict: the GOP may have its nominee locked-up before Feb. 5, with the Democrats fighting all the way to their Convention in Denver.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Nevada Caucuses Update

2008-01-17T17:43:00.000-06:00

Today Federal District Judge James Mahan declined to issue a temporary injunction against the Democratic Party of Nevada's at large caucuses. “State Democrats have a First Amendment right to association, to assemble and to set their own rules,” Judge Mahan said.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Federal Court Hears Case on Nevada Caucuses Today

2008-01-17T13:36:00.000-06:00

Last Friday, Nevada's teachers union filed a lawsuit against the Democratic Party of Nevada in Federal Court claiming their at-large precincts violate 14th Amendment equal protection clause. The at-large precincts are set up at nine Vegas hotels and resorts by the Democratic Party of Nevada to afford thousands of hotel employees an opportunity to participate in the midday causes while at work. The state teachers union argues in their complaint that these causes provide special privileges for employees in the Vegas' service industry that are not available to other voters of different occupations throughout the state. The complaint goes on to argue that the at-large caucuses have also unfairly increased the amount of delegates awarded to the precincts in Clark County, the home of the Las Vegas strip, at the expense of other precincts.

The Democratic National Committee filed a motion to intervene in the case on Tuesday, arguing for that the previously recognized right of the national parties to set the rules for the nominating contests be upheld.

The political divisiveness of this case centers around accusations that the state teacher unions, whose leadership is made up of many supporters of Senator Hillary Clinton, is trying to suppress the vote of hotel employees who are members of the powerful Culinary Workers Union Local 226, which has endorsed Obama. The Clinton Campaign has rejected claims that they were involved in bringing the suit, as was expressed by an indignant Bill Clinton earlier today.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Lunch Discussion with Former Assistant Attorney General Rachel Brand - Thursday, January 24

2008-01-14T14:50:00.000-06:00

Please join us as we continue our Lunch Discussion Series with Institute Advisory Board member and former United States Assistant Attorney General Rachel Brand as she speaks on:

"An Insider's Perspective on Federal Judicial Confirmations"

Thursday, January 24, 2008 from 12:15pm - 1:20pm at the University of Minnesota Law School, Room 50 (Directions and parking information here).

This event is free and open to the public. Lunch will be provided.

Asst. AG Brand led the judicial confirmation preparations for both Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. (Seen below, center, during the Roberts confirmation):

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Minnesota Caucus on "Super Tuesday", February 5

2008-01-14T14:20:00.000-06:00

Minnesota will hold its caucuses at 7:00pm on Tuesday, February 5.

Partisan precinct caucuses will determine Minnesota's National Delegates for the Presidential nomination. Caucuses also elect local party officers, propose issue resolutions for party platforms, and elect delegates to local party conventions.

Click below for precinct caucus location information by political party:

Republican Party of Minnesota

Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party of Minnesota

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Democratic Presidential Race Taking Shape?

2008-01-14T14:00:00.000-06:00

After splitting wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, Democratic Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.) are mounting increasingly aggressive campaigns against each other, as the Washington Post's Dan Balz notes. Far from being a two-way race, however, Balz also argues that former Senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) has a very important role to play, perhaps in siphoning votes from either Clinton or Obama, or in a potential decision to release his delegates to either candidate.

Edwards, however, says that he's "in to win," and some polls in soon-to-vote states support such a decision. What seems clear, then, is that the race for the Democratic presidential nomination is wide-open. The next contest in which all three will be on the ballot is in Nevada, where residents will caucus January 19. Stay tuned for results and predictions of the outcome.

Enjoy the Law and Politics Blog? Subscribe to our RSS Feed