Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Court’S Gerrymandering Conundrum: How Hyper-Partisanship In Politics Alters The Rucho Decision, Vince Mancini
The Court’S Gerrymandering Conundrum: How Hyper-Partisanship In Politics Alters The Rucho Decision, Vince Mancini
Utah Law Review
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rucho v. Common Cause was the latest in a line of opinions regarding reviewability of gerrymandering claims related to the constitutionally required decennial state redistricting process. In Rucho, the Court altered the course of future electoral processes and held that partisan gerrymandering claims were nonjusticiable. In doing so, the Court failed to consider obvious pitfalls in limiting the type of review available for these gerrymandering claims. In particular, the Court failed to understand the gravity of the impact such a decision would have on minority voting power and discarded one of the few structural …
The Positive And Negative Purcell Principle, Harry B. Dodsworth
The Positive And Negative Purcell Principle, Harry B. Dodsworth
Utah Law Review
The Purcell Principle—the idea that courts should think twice about changing the rules before elections to avoid confusing voters—is sorely misunderstood. Despite deriving from a three-page opinion, the Purcell Principle has morphed into one of the Supreme Court’s most powerful election-law doctrines. By and large, the Court has interpreted the principle as a bright-line rule barring any judicial intervention close to elections and has overwhelmingly used the principle to uphold voting restrictions. That’s a problem because the Purcell Principle is not a bright-line rule. And it’s certainly not one that rubber stamps voting restrictions. To make matters worse, we know …