Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Campaign finance (5)
- Election law (3)
- Freedom of speech (3)
- Voting rights (3)
- Citizens United v. FEC (2)
-
- First Amendment (2)
- Gerrymandering (2)
- Redistricting (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- 501(c)(4) (1)
- Activism (1)
- Anti-colonialism (1)
- Antonin Scalia (1)
- Campaign ethics (1)
- Campaign speech (1)
- Citizen ballot initiative (1)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (1)
- Citizenship (1)
- Conservative libertarianism (1)
- Disenfranchisement (1)
- Early voting (1)
- Enfranchisement (1)
- Felony disenfranchisement (1)
- Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections (1)
- Illinois (1)
- International law (1)
- Judicial campaigns (1)
- Judicial impartiality (1)
- LatCrit (1)
- Minnesota Canon of Judicial Conduct (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Question For Another Day: Hooker V. Illinois State Board Of Elections And Its Effect On The Vitality Of Citizen Ballot Initiatives And Redistricting Reform In Illinois, Thomas Q. Ford
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Like most states, Illinois is no stranger to political gerrymandering. Since 2010, redistricting reformers have made repeated efforts to change the way Illinois's political maps are drawn, essentially by minimizing or eliminating the role lawmakers play in the process. Polls show the vast majority of Illinoisans support such a change. Reformers have chosen Illinois's citizen ballot initiative as their vehicle to amend the redistricting process, but every proposed initiative has been struck down in court before reaching voters. Most recently, the Illinois Supreme Court rejected a proposed initiative in Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections. This Note argues …
Keynote Address: Judging The Political And Political Judging: Justice Scalia As Case Study, Richard L. Hasen
Keynote Address: Judging The Political And Political Judging: Justice Scalia As Case Study, Richard L. Hasen
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This is a revised version of a Keynote Address delivered at “The Supreme Court and American Politics,” a symposium held October 17, 2017 at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. In this Address, Professor Hasen considers through the lens of Justice Scalia’s opinions the role that views of the political process play, at least rhetorically, in how Supreme Court Justices decide cases. It focuses on Justice Scalia’s contradictory views on self-dealing and incumbency protection across a range of cases, comparing campaign finance on the one hand to partisan gerrymandering, voter identification laws, political patronage, and ballot access rules on the other. …
The Consequences Of Citizens United: What Do The Lawyers Say?, Ann Southworth
The Consequences Of Citizens United: What Do The Lawyers Say?, Ann Southworth
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This Essay examines a polarized world of advocacy over campaign finance regulation in the Roberts Court. It considers what lawyers who filed party and amicus briefs in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission have to say about the consequences of the decision. It shows that the lawyers generally agree about the ruling’s direct consequences but strongly disagree about whether those consequences are good or bad for the country and what lessons the public should draw. This Essay also explores the competing frames that these lawyers bring to questions about money in politics and their competing perspectives about government and where …
A Quantum Congress, Jorge R. Roig
A Quantum Congress, Jorge R. Roig
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This article tries to address the problem of a corrupt and broken electoral system that has been captured by special interests through big money spending in political campaigns, while at the same time preserving the spirit of the Free Speech Clause of our Constitution. In doing so, this article first reviews and summarizes the different alternatives proposed as potential fixes for the campaign finance problem. It then explains why none of the proposed alternatives can accomplish the dual goals set out above. Finally, the article briefly sketches a proposal for a fundamental reworking of our representative democracy by substituting legislative …
Tiered Personhood And The Excluded Voter, Atiba R. Ellis
Tiered Personhood And The Excluded Voter, Atiba R. Ellis
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The modern discourse critiquing vote denial policies in the United States has taken two distinct paths. The first and more recent path has been to critique the effects of legislation like voter identification laws, narrowed early voting opportunities, and similar enactments to hyper-regulate the voting process, effecting, as some argue, the ability for the poor, the elderly, and minorities to vote. The second strain of this voter suppression discourse relates to the express exclusion of persons who have been convicted of felonies from the exercise of the franchise. While both vote denial by effect or by express disenfranchisement have raised …
The Legal Quagmire Of Irc § 501(C)(4) Organizations And The Consequential Rise Of Dark Money In Elections, Daniel C. Kirby
The Legal Quagmire Of Irc § 501(C)(4) Organizations And The Consequential Rise Of Dark Money In Elections, Daniel C. Kirby
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Section 501(c)(4) organizations have recently become a hot topic with respect to campaign finance. Following the 2010 Supreme Court case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the number of IRC § 501(c)(4) organizations ballooned in number, and the amount of money flowing through § 501(c)(4) groups increased 2390 percent from the 2008 election cycle to the 2012 election cycle. This essay explores the dangers to the campaign finance system of the substantial increase in spending by IRC § 501(c)(4) organizations. The foundational claim of this essay is that IRC § 501(c) is in need of a statutory and regulatory overhaul …
The Global "Parliament Of Mothers": History, The Revolutionary Tradition, And International Law In The Pre-War Women's Movement, Susan Hinely
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In spite of recent literature that examines late nineteenth and early twentieth century transnational movements in innovative ways, the largest transnational movement of that period, the women's movement, remains lodged in academic and popular memory as the "suffrage movement," a single-issue campaign waged by privileged Victorian women, a foregone development in the march of electoral progress that ended in victory with postwar enfranchisement. A fresh approach to the suffrage archive reveals instead a far more radical movement than conventional history suggests, one that explicitly linked its cause with both the revolutionary democratic tradition and with anti-colonial activism. Like the non-Western …
Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel
Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In determining the shape of the free speech rights and anti-corruption concerns that courts must balance in campaign finance cases, judges are influenced by their own underlying understandings of what an ideal democracy should look like. For judges to decide whether the government is appropriately regulating the political process, the rules that allow all citizens to interact with and shape their democracy, judges must first decide what that democracy ought to look like. This affords judges a great deal of discretion in campaign finance cases. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a particularly bold judicial attempt to reshape the …
Free Speech & Tainted Justice: Restoring The Public's Confidence In The Judiciary In The Wake Of Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Gregory W. Jones
Free Speech & Tainted Justice: Restoring The Public's Confidence In The Judiciary In The Wake Of Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Gregory W. Jones
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The United States Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White was the first shot fired in an ongoing battle over judicial campaign ethics. The White decision invalidated a Minnesota Canon of Judicial Conduct prohibiting judicial candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal or political topics. Subsequent to White, numerous states have faced challenges to their judicial canons of conduct by groups advocating for an increased breadth of permissible speech in judicial campaigns. While White and its progeny have safeguarded the first amendment rights of judicial candidates, significant concerns have been raised regarding how best to …