OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

Minnesota Supreme Court orders responses due by 9am tomorrow

The Minnesota Supreme Court has ordered all parties to file any responses to Coleman’s petition by tomorrow at 9 a.m. The counties must also inform the court as to whether they considered additional ballots suggested for inclusion by either of the campaigns and their reasons if they declined to consider additional ballots. See the order here.  Minnesota law will not allow the governor to issue a certificate of election while election contest suits are pending making it unlikely that a Senator will be seated by January 6. The campaigns are expected to have agreed to the inclusion of about 900 absentee ballots of the 1,346 identified by local officials as wrongly rejected when counting begins tomorrow. However, the Minnesota Supreme Court could revisit the standard for determining which ballots to include. Some, including Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, have questioned the Court’s earlier decision to turn over the decision of whether a voter’s ballot may count to the campaigns. Voters themselves can challenge the rejection of their ballot in the state Supreme Court but it will likely be too late for any that were wrongly rejected by the officials or either of the campaigns to be included in the state canvass. See the Star Tribune coverage here.

Commentary

Donald B. Tobin

FAQ on social welfare organizations

Donald B. Tobin

The Frank E. and Virginia H. Bazler Designated Professor in Business Law and a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz explains the nuances of social welfare organizations and federal regulations related to them.

more commentary...

In the News

Donald B. Tobin

How Did The IRS Get The Job Of Vetting Political Activity?

Professor Donald Tobin was interviewed by the Boston NPR station on its show Here & Now about the Internal Revenue Service's investigation into groups classified as social welfare organizations (marked by the 501(c)(4) tax classification). The IRS was in search of groups that are not focusing primarly on the social welfare of the country, but have a strong political advocacy facet. Political advocacy groups might want to be classified as 501(c)(4) organizations because under that classification they do not have to disclose their donors.

"The key is if you going to be engaged in candidate-type advocacy, and if you're going to intervene in elections and engage in election advocacy, we want disclosure of who your donors are," Tobin said.

“What groups are trying to do here is avoid having to disclose,” Tobin continued. “By earning the classification of social welfare, they’re avoiding the campaign disclosure that’s required for political organizations. So that’s really the underpinning of why we have this mess of the IRS having to get in and investigate and figure out whether an organization is political or not.”

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Ohio House Committee Recommends Upholding Landis' Election Victory

Yesterday, an Ohio House of Representatives committee recommended 5-4 that the Ohio House uphold the election victory of Republican State Representative Al Landis over Democratic challenger Josh O'Farrell. In February, the Ohio Supreme Court sent the O'Farrell v. Landis record to the House for consideration. According to an article in the Canton Repository, committee chairman and State Representative Matt Huffman said he expects a vote by the full House later this month.

more info & analysis...

Related News Wire Stories

more newswire...