Daily Brew: September 19, 2018

September 19, 2018

Today we bring you a little something to celebrate with us + the start of early voting in the general election   Welcome to the Wednesday, September 19 Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day: Ballotpedia Celebrates 1 Billion pageviews Early voting starts in two states on Friday California man detained 17 years ago released under Mathews v. Eldridge precedent Ballotpedia closes out primary election season with organizational milestone We tracked our 1 billionth pageview last Thursday—the day of this year’s final statewide primary election in New York—closing out a primary season that saw exponential growth in readership of our nearly 280,000 encyclopedic articles. Ballotpedia’s articles have been viewed 85 million times in 2018 alone, already surpassing last year’s total pageviews by more than 60 percent. In a non-presidential election year, Ballotpedia.org has seen 57 percent more traffic than the same time period in 2016. We’re so honored and humbled that so many people have visited the website. “Reaching 1 billion pageviews is the result of many hours of staff conversations, research, writing, and editing, but also of thousands of emails, phone calls, and social media exchanges with readers,” our Editor-in-Chief Geoff Pallay said. “This milestone is as much their accomplishment as it is ours. We are honored when readers choose Ballotpedia, and we are delighted to help make their political research efforts that much easier and more pleasant.” Learn more Early voting starts in two states on Friday I was having a conversation with a co-worker this morning about how we are in that awkward period where primaries have ended and we are quickly switching to general election mode. He then asked, “Well, when does early voting start across the country?” The answer? Friday! Minnesota and Vermont kick-off early voting in two days. On Saturday, New Jersey voters can cast their early votes. Rounding out the states that start their early voting process in September: Illinois, North Dakota, and Wyoming. Another 24 states begin their early voting periods in October. Learn more→ California man detained 17 years ago released under Mathews v. Eldridge precedent A three-judge panel of the California Second District Court of Appeal ordered the release of George Vasquez on September 12, a California man who had been detained for 17 years awaiting trial for commitment as a sexually violent predator, on the grounds that the state had violated Vasquez’s due process rights under the 14th Amendment. The panel consisted of judges Gail Ruderman Feuer (appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown (D)), Dennis Perluss (appointed by former Gov. Gray Davis (D)), and Laurie Zelon (appointed by Davis (D)). Vasquez was convicted in 1995 of committing lewd acts on a child and served 12 years in state prison. Prior to his scheduled release in 2000, Los Angeles County prosecutors petitioned to have Vasquez committed to a state hospital as a sexually violent predator for two years. Instead, Vazquez’s hearing and trial dates were delayed for the next 17 years in order to allow for a series of six court-appointed attorneys to prepare for trial. Vasquez objected to the delays in his case in 2016. Superior Court Judge James Bianco dismissed the prosecutors’ petition in January 2018. Bianco argued that the breakdown in the state’s public defender system had violated Vasquez’s right to timely proceedings. The appellate panel later upheld Bianco’s decision, which was based in part on U.S. Supreme Court precedent concerning due process in the 1976 case  Mathews v. Eldridge. Here’s why I’m interested: The U.S. Supreme Court developed a three-part test in Mathews v. Eldridge for lower courts to apply when determining whether or not an individual has received due process during administrative proceedings. Courts must consider (1) the private interest at stake, (2) the effect on the private interest in the event of an erroneous determination as well as the value of any additional procedural safeguards, and (3) the government's interest, including the potential administrative burden of additional procedural safeguards. The California appellate panel applied the Mathews v. Eldridge test in the context of Vasquez’s pre-trial delay pending an involuntary civil commitment. The panel found that (1) detainment awaiting trial put Vasquez’s liberty at stake, (2) the length of Vasquez's detainment deprived him of his liberty, and (3) the government would not have suffered an additional administrative burden by going to trial in two years as opposed to delaying the trial for 17 years. Learn more→