Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Race and law (6)
- Congressional districts (4)
- Gerrymandering (4)
- Minorities (4)
- Redistricting (4)
-
- Voting (4)
- Racial discrimination (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Voting Rights Act (3)
- African Americans (2)
- Democracy (2)
- Elections (2)
- Miller v. Johnson (2)
- Voting rights (2)
- Appellate court (1)
- Buckley v. Valeo (1)
- Census (1)
- Citizen participation (1)
- Congressional disctricts (1)
- Direct election (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- District courts (1)
- Districting (1)
- Election fraud (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Enumeration (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Equal opportunity (1)
- Equal protection clause (1)
- Equality (1)
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
A More Sensible Approach To Regulating Independent Expenditures: Defending The Constitutionality Of The Fed's New Express Advocacy Standard, Michael D. Leffel
A More Sensible Approach To Regulating Independent Expenditures: Defending The Constitutionality Of The Fed's New Express Advocacy Standard, Michael D. Leffel
Michigan Law Review
Campaign finance reformers argue that the "unholy alliance of private money and public elections" has created "a crisis of confidence in our elected officials." The now-deceased campaign reform advocate Philip M. Stem summed up the role of money in campaigns this way: "[M]oney-power has replaced people-power as the driving force in American politics and the determinant of electoral victory." One form of "money-power" in elections that received a great deal of attention in the last election cycle was "independent expenditures." Independent expenditures are funds spent by interested individuals or groups - usually in the form of television or radio advertisements …
Indirect Effects Of Direct Election: A Structural Examination Of The Seventh Amendment, Vikram D. Amar
Indirect Effects Of Direct Election: A Structural Examination Of The Seventh Amendment, Vikram D. Amar
Vanderbilt Law Review
Federalism is hot. Courts are trying to preserve it.' Politicians are trying to reinvent it. And academics are trying just to understand it. Inspired by this renewed interest in the relationship between federal and state governments, I decided to undertake a fresh examination of the Seventeenth Amendment which requires direct election-by the People of each State-of members of the United States Senate. After all, although direct election has not received extensive academic attention, the amendment's removal of state legislatures from the federal electoral process would seem to have significantly reworked the Constitution's federal framework; state legislative election of Senators was …
The Three-Judge District Court In Voting Rights Litigation, Michael E. Solimine
The Three-Judge District Court In Voting Rights Litigation, Michael E. Solimine
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In recent Terms the Supreme Court has heard numerous appeals from the decisions of three-judge district courts in controversial Voting Rights Act cases as well as in challenges to congressional districts designed allegedly to facilitate the election of members of minority groups. Although the cases themselves have been followed closely, the institution of the three-judge district court itself has received relatively little attention, even though Congress passed legislation in 1976 that restricted the three-judge court's jurisdiction to reapportionment and certain Voting Rights Act cases. In this Article, Professor Solimine argues that numerous problems attend the formation and operation of such …
Constitutional Law—Equal Protection - Race Shall Not Be The Predominant Factor In Congressional District Drawing, Kevin G. Beckham
Constitutional Law—Equal Protection - Race Shall Not Be The Predominant Factor In Congressional District Drawing, Kevin G. Beckham
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
United States V. Hays: A Winnowing Of Standing To Sue In Racial Gerrymandering Claims, Jack Pritchard
United States V. Hays: A Winnowing Of Standing To Sue In Racial Gerrymandering Claims, Jack Pritchard
Mercer Law Review
In United States v. Hays, the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether individuals who reside outside racially gerrymandered districts have standing to sue on racial gerrymandering claims. In May 1992, Louisiana passed Act 42 of its Regular Session, which redrew its district boundaries to form two majority-minority districts -Districts 4 and 2. District 4 was a "Z-shaped creature" that zigzagged through twenty-eight parishes and five major cities, yet the Act was precleared by the United States Attorney General. The plaintiffs, Hays et al., were residents of Lincoln Parish, which was located in the newly formed District …
Appellate Court Voting Rules, Scott B. Smith
Appellate Court Voting Rules, Scott B. Smith
Vanderbilt Law Review
During the 1996 term, the United States Supreme Court made a candid confession about its voting practices. In Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, the Court overruled Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. and recognized that when a justice defers to the majority against his or her own reasoning inconclusive precedent results. Union Gas was particularly unusual because Justice White switched his vote to assure a result in a three-remedy case where none of the three remedies had the support of a majority. In Seminole Tribe, the Court admitted Union Gas "has, since its issuance, been of questionable precedential value, largely …
Democratic National Committee V. Edward J. Rollins: Politics As Usual Or Unusual Politics?, Rachel E. Berry
Democratic National Committee V. Edward J. Rollins: Politics As Usual Or Unusual Politics?, Rachel E. Berry
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Vote Dilution And The Census Undercount: A State-By-State Remedy, Christopher M. Taylor
Vote Dilution And The Census Undercount: A State-By-State Remedy, Christopher M. Taylor
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that groups seeking to correct underrepresentation caused by the differential undercount do not have standing to sue the Secretary of Commerce but that they can sue their state governments in an effort to force them to use the best population data available in the construction of congressional districts. Part I details the deeply rooted character of the differential undercount, describes statistical means that could have been employed to adjust the 1990 census, and demonstrates that the adjusted count surpasses the official census as an accurate representation of the true population. Part II examines recent litigation that has …
Can Minority Voting Rights Survive Miller V. Johnson, Laughlin Mcdonald
Can Minority Voting Rights Survive Miller V. Johnson, Laughlin Mcdonald
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Part I of this Article reviews the congressional redistricting process in Georgia, particularly the State's efforts to comply with the Voting Rights Act and avoid the dilution of minority voting strength. Part II describes the plaintiffs' constitutional challenge and the State's asserted defenses, or more accurately its lack of asserted defenses. Part III argues that the decision of the majority rests upon wholly false assumptions about the colorblindness of the political process and the harm caused by remedial redistricting. Part IV notes the expansion in Miller of the cause of action first recognized in Shaw v. Reno. Part V …
Identifying The Harm In Racial Gerrymandering Claims, Samuel Issacharoff, Thomas C. Goldstein
Identifying The Harm In Racial Gerrymandering Claims, Samuel Issacharoff, Thomas C. Goldstein
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This Article proceeds along two lines. First, it reviews the theories of harm set forth in the Justices' various opinions, i.e., the articulated risks to individual rights that may or may not be presented by racial gerrymandering. What is learned from this survey is that Shaw and its progeny serve different purposes for different members of the Court. Four members of the Shaw, Miller v. Johnson, and United States v. Hays majorities-Chief Justice Rehnquist, along with Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas- are far more concerned with "race" than "gerrymandering." In particular, they consider all race-based government classifications to be inherently …
The Empitness Of Majority Rule, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
The Empitness Of Majority Rule, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
In this Note, the author steers away from the current substantive debates surrounding the Voting Rights Act, its various amendments, and the "correct" way of interpreting its intended benefits and constitutionally accepted mandates. Instead, indirectly joins the many "radical" voices advocating for a departure from the majoritarian stranglehold-the decision-making process where fifty percent plus one of the voting population carry the election. The author does so not by suggesting yet another mechanism by which representatives may be elected, but by critiquing the perceived underpinnings of our democratic system of government. The author does not profess to delineate a definitive interpretation …
Drawing The Line On Incumbency Protection, Sally Dworak-Fisher
Drawing The Line On Incumbency Protection, Sally Dworak-Fisher
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
In an effort to fill the void in scholarly debate and legal analysis, this Note evaluates incumbency protection as a redistricting principle and analyzes its treatment in various court opinions. After arguing that protecting incumbents is not a legitimate redistricting objective, this Note illustrates how the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have been reluctant to pass judgment on incumbency protection. This Note contrasts this "hands-off" approach to the strict scrutiny afforded claims of racial gerrymandering and argues that such an approach enables incumbents to manipulate the Voting Rights Act for their self-interest. Additionally, this Note argues that incumbents, a …