The Republican National Lawyers Association joined a coalition of groups in opposing David Barron to be a judge on the First Circuit.  Barron’s nomination has drawn widespread criticism from the left (ACLU) and right-of-center groups.  An excerpt from the letter:

At the RNC meeting in Memphis last week, RNC General Counsel, RNC Committeeman from Tennessee, and RNLA Vice Chair John Ryder made a successful amendment to the RNC rules for the party to take control of the Republican Presidential Debate process in 2016:

Al Sharpton committed vote fraud back in his first days in politics and is now the leading vote fraud denier.   One of the pair of New Black Panther Party members who was waving a Billy-club and intimating voters was not only spared prosecution at the last minute by Eric Holder’s Justice Department, he was rewarded by being elected a local Democrat Party Official.  Melowese Richardson who was convicted of vote fraud was never the less given an ovation as a hero at a liberal political rally. 

In a fit of hubris only an academic could muster, law professor Zephyr Teachout recently mocked Justice Roberts’s acknowledgement in McCutcheon v. FEC that the line between influence and quid pro quo corruption can at times seem blurry. As she derisively paraphrased, “In other words, there is no line, respect the line.” McCutcheon particularly distresses academics like Teachout because of the forceful way the majority limited political corruption to quid pro quo exchanges (or their appearance).

One knows an Obama judicial nominee is in trouble when even the New York Times is talking about it:

Today we are posting a great speech about the President’s latest effort to ignore the Constitution on the separation of powers.  Senator Orrin Hatch gave this speech one week ago and it is well worth reading.  

We thought we would highlight a few paragraphs from a recent editorial in the Washington Times calling the Democrats and liberals out for playing politics with Voter ID.  It does not seem to be arguable that the judge in Wisconsin at a minimum in writing his decision was playing politics. 

I appreciate Professor Hasen responding to our post on Project21.  However, there is one overall problem with Professor Hasen’s response; he can only cite partisan sources.  Our original post relied mostly on examples supporting ID and opposing Vote Fraud from Democrats or truly non-partisan sources.  Professor Hasen is merely echoing the far left with his response.  On his specific points.

I was shocked yesterday to read the use of a report by News21 by UCI Professor and election law blogger Rick Hasen.  The News21 report is so biased and flawed I doubted anyone would take it seriously.  Here is an excerpt of a rebuttal that we prepared at the time of the report in 2012. it is particularly ironic to use the News21 report in regards to a Wisconsin decision, where an unbiased and nonpartisan report by a task force of the

Milwaukee Police Department came out for voter ID and raised the red flag on vote fraud in Wisconsin.  The left has never rebutted the police report.

One of the key recommendations RNLA agreed with in the Presidential Commission on Election Administration’s report was that election officials adopt the use of electronic poll books to check-in voters at the polling place: