I have written a new draft paper, papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…, "Identifying and Minimizing the Risk of Election Subversion and Stolen Elections in the Contemporary United States," in connection with @UCILaw's Sept. 24 conference on Election Subversion. calendar.law.uci.edu/event/fefs_ele… /1
Abstract: The US faces a serious risk that the 2024 presidential election, and other future U.S. elections, will not be conducted fairly, and that the candidates taking office will not reflect the free choices made by eligible voters under previously announced election rules. /2
The potential mechanisms by which election losers may be declared election winners are: /3
(1) usurpation of voter choices for President by state legislatures purporting to exercise constitutional authority to do so, possibly blessed by a partisan-divided Supreme Court and acquiesced to by Republicans in Congress; /4
(2) fraudulent or suppressive election administration or vote counting by law- or norm-breaking election officials; and /5
(3) violent or disruptive private action that prevents voting, interferes with the counting of votes, or interrupts the assumption of power by the actual winning candidate. /6
Until recently, it would have been absurd to raise the possibility of such election subversion or a stolen election in the United States. Few cases have emerged in at least the last 50 years in the United States of actual election subversion by election officials, /7
leading to an election loser being declared the election winner, despite other unique pathologies of American election administration. /8
Ironically, the conduct of former President Donald J. Trump in repeatedly and falsely claiming that the 2020 election was stolen has markedly raised the potential for an actual stolen election in the United States. /9
Millions of Trump’s Republican supporters now believe the false claim of a stolen election, and some Republican elected officials have pursued bogus sham “audits” and taken other steps that undermine voter confidence in the fairness of the election process. /10
Threats of violence and intimidation have led to unprecedented attrition among election administrators, and some exiting officials are being replaced by those who may not have allegiance to the integrity of the election system. /11
Those Republican election officials who stood up to Trump in 2020 and saved the United States from a potential constitutional and political crisis have been censured, stripped of power, and challenged for office by those embracing the “Big Lie.” /12
Together, these actions serve both to delegitimate the election of Democrats including President Joe Biden in 2020 and to open the door to election manipulation in future elections. /13
Elected officials, election officials, and others believing or purporting to believe the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen may seek to justify subverting future election results in response to earlier purported fraud. /14
The solutions to these problems are both legal and political. Legal changes should include: (1) paper ballot, chain-of-custody, and transparency requirements, including risk-limiting audits of election results; /15
(2) rules limiting the discretion of those who certify the votes, including Congress through reform of the Electoral Count Act; (3) rules limiting the over-politicization of election administration, especially by state legislatures; /16
(4) increased criminal penalties imposed on those who tamper with federal elections or commit violence or intimidation of voters, elected officials, or elected candidates; and /17
(5) rules countering disinformation about elections, particularly disinformation about when, where, and how people vote. /18
In addition, it will be necessary to organize for political action to reenforce rule-of-law norms in elections. This means advocating for laws that deter election subversion and against laws making stolen elections easier; /19
politically opposing would-be election administrators who embrace false claims about stolen elections; and preparing for mass, peaceful protests in the event of attempts to subvert fair election outcomes. /20
Part I of this Essay describes the path to this unexpected moment of democratic peril in the United States. Part II explains the five potential mechanisms by which American elections may be subverted in the future. /21
Part III recommends steps that can and should be taken to minimize this risk. Preserving and protecting American democracy from the risk of election subversion should be at the top of everyone’s agenda. The time to act is now, before American democracy disappears. /22
The third panel at Sept. 24 @UCILaw conference on election subversion turns to solutions and speaks to experts on law, politics, and Congress: Bob Bauer, Ben Ginsberg, @SarahLongwell25@MaraLiasson /26
If you want more information about the work of the @UCILaw Fair Elections and Free Speech Center, which I co-direct with the great @davidakaye, check this out: law.uci.edu/centers/fefs/ /28
Delighted to report that my draft paper, "Identifying and Minimizing the Risk of Election Subversion and Stolen Elections in the Contemporary United States" will be published by the @HarvLRev Forum in Spring 2022. Draft here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… Working on revisions now.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Making a million dollar prize contingent on registering to vote is illegal. See 52 USC 10307(c) govinfo.gov/content/pkg/US… Also, with PA registration soon closing for this election it may not accomplish what Musk wants. x.com/hugolowell/sta…
The DOJ election crimes manual specifically mentions lotteries for voters as prohibited vote buying under that statute. . See pages 44-45justice.gov/criminal/file/…
Blog post at #ELB: Elon Musk Veers Into Clearly Illegal Vote Buying, Offering $1 Million Per Day Lottery Prize Only to Registered Voters electionlawblog.org/?p=146397
Rick Hasen’s Live Blog of the Supreme Court’s Oral Argument Over Trump’s Claim of Immunity in the Federal Election Subversion Case (Refresh this page frequently for updates) electionlawblog.org/?p=142644
Today under the auspices of @UCLA_Law #SafeguardingDemocracyProject, an ad hoc cross-ideological diverse committee has issued a major report: "24 for ’24: Urgent Recommendations in Law, Media, Politics, and Tech for Fair and Legitimate 2024 Elections." /1 law.ucla.edu/sites/default/…
Back in March, the UCLA Law Safeguarding Democracy Project held a conference, Can American Democracy Survive the 2024 Elections? /2law.ucla.edu/academics/cent…
Following the conference some of the participants met as an ad hoc committee to consider recommendations in law, politics, media, and tech for fair and legitimate elections in 2024. /3
About to be done producing free content for Elon here. Might just keep up automated tweets linking to blog posts. Find me @rickhasen@mastodon.online
Gonna need a lot of help here. Thank you all
I had started posting @rickhasen@mastodon.online yesterday and the posts were automatically coming here as tweets too thanks to the mastodon-twitter cross-poster. I've turned that off. So follow me over there if you want my content.
Garland has a lot of control over who gets appointed as special counsel. He can pick someone with integrity and respect on both sides of the aisle. And someone who can act quickly. He understands how Mueller faltered.
Garland also will have ultimate control over what happens. Better to appoint the counsel quickly, as it was inevitable that Trump was going to run for office and claim a witch hunt no matter what.
I do not believe anything in the RNC consent decree prevented the RNC from pursuing litigation over election rules.
There are other reasons by election litigation has exploded, nearly tripling in the period since Bush v. Gore in 2000.
A few explanations:
1. The 2000 election taught political operatives that in close elections, it may be possible to litigate to victory. That's especially true in a system that is decentralized and partisan, where there are lots of discretionary decisions to be made over how elections are run. /2
2. As @derektmuller has shown, recent changes in federal campaign finance law allow political parties to raise special funds for litigation. They have millions to spend, so why not sue over election rules? /3