Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Liberty V. Elections: Minority Rights And The Failure Of Direct Democracy, David A. Schultz
Liberty V. Elections: Minority Rights And The Failure Of Direct Democracy, David A. Schultz
David A Schultz
Majority rule and special interest politics can threaten individual rights. Madisonian democracy addresses this threat through constitutional mechanisms such as a bill of rights, checks and balances, and representation. The Progressive Era reforms of initiative, referendum, and recall were adopted as a means to further democracy and break entrenched politics captured by interest groups. Yet it is not clear if these experiments in direct democracy have protected rights, let alone confined special interest politics. Using the 2012 Minnesota constitutional amendments on marriage and voter ID as examples,, this paper argues that elections, constitutional politics, and the use of initiative and …
Wealth V. Democracy: The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Twenty-Fourth Amendment., David A. Schultz
Wealth V. Democracy: The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Twenty-Fourth Amendment., David A. Schultz
David A Schultz
The Twenty-Fourth Amendment banning the poll tax is a constitutional curiosity. With the single exception of one Court decision, the Amendment has never been successfully invoked to protect the right to vote. This article seeks to unsilence and resurrect the Twenty-Fourth Amendment and to make the case for a broader interpretation of it that takes off from where decisions such as Harman and Harper end. Specifically, the Article seeks to disconnect the poll tax from a narrow reading of its legacy during the Jim Crow era when its primary purpose was to disenfranchise African-Americans. Instead, the poll tax should be …
Wealth V. Democracy: The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Twenty-Fourth Amendment, David A. Schultz
Wealth V. Democracy: The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Twenty-Fourth Amendment, David A. Schultz
David A Schultz
Abstract: The adoption of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment banning poll taxes in federal elections was intended to protect franchise rights and increase voter turnout. However, since its adoption it has yet to be successfully invoked to invalidate any practice, including poll taxes and most recently voter photo IDs. This article seeks to resurrect the Twenty-Fourth Amendment and to make the case for a broader interpretation of it. Specifically, the Article seeks to disconnect the poll tax from a narrow reading of its legacy during the Jim Crow era when its primary purpose was to disenfranchise African-Americans. Instead, the poll tax should …