Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing: Gaffney And The Improper Role Of Politics In The Districting Process, Robert A. Koch Oct 2005

A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing: Gaffney And The Improper Role Of Politics In The Districting Process, Robert A. Koch

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Supreme Court unanimously agrees that excessive partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional. A plurality of the Court, however, would hold partisan gerrymandering claims to be nonjusticiable due to the lack of a judicially manageable standard. This Note synthesizes the opinions of a majority of the Court in Vieth v. Jubelirer on the precise harms of partisan gerrymandering and argues that excessive partisan gerrymandering unconstitutionally burdens the representational rights of individual voters. This Note proposes a judicially manageable standard to address that representational harm based on the Court's standard in Shaw v. Reno.


When Judges Carve Democracies: A Primer On Court-Drawn Redistricting Plans, Nathaniel Persily Jun 2005

When Judges Carve Democracies: A Primer On Court-Drawn Redistricting Plans, Nathaniel Persily

All Faculty Scholarship

This essay presents guidelines for courts that undertake to draw their own redistricting plans. Although several dozen courts over the last four redistricting cycles have drawn their own plans, there is precious little in the case law or secondary sources to provide guidance. As a result, courts vary considerably in the procedures they follow and the substantive factors they take into account in their plans. This essay discusses the unique legal constraints on court-drawn plans and assesses the costs and benefits of following various procedures or substantive redistricting principles. The unique context of each case that spurs judicial involvement will …


The Case For Federal Anti-Gerrymandering Legislation, Brian O'Neill Apr 2005

The Case For Federal Anti-Gerrymandering Legislation, Brian O'Neill

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Partisan gerrymandering is a political tradition the United States can no longer afford. Due in part to the effects of partisan gerrymandering, very few congressional elections are meaningfully competitive. This Note argues that partisan gerrymandering damages both the quality of American democracy and the federal system of the United States. This Note concludes that the important federal interests at stake warrant action by Congress to halt partisan gerrymandering. The Note further concludes that any action by Congress should incorporate the principles of federalism by resisting the temptation to micromanage and Congress should instead require state commissions to draft the boundaries …


Regulating Democracy Through Democracy: The Use Of Direct Legislation In Election Law Reform, Nathaniel Persily, Melissa Cully Anderson Feb 2005

Regulating Democracy Through Democracy: The Use Of Direct Legislation In Election Law Reform, Nathaniel Persily, Melissa Cully Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

The study examines a wealth of election law reforms - term limits (for governor and state legislators), campaign finance reform (contribution limits and public funding), redistricting (pre-Baker v. Carr and creation of commissions), creation and regulation of primaries, and women's suffrage - to figure out whether differences exist between the election law regimes in initiative and non-initiative states and whether these differences (if any) might be attributed to the use of the initiative process. We find that in very few cases - legislative term limits and perhaps redistricting commissions - do initiative states differ noticeably from non-initiative states, and in …


After Georgia V. Ashcroft: The Primacy Of Proportionality, Felix B. Chang Jan 2005

After Georgia V. Ashcroft: The Primacy Of Proportionality, Felix B. Chang

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

This Note argues that the majority in Ashcroft have left courts with an unadministerable standard-not so much for reasons that Justice Souter articulated in his dissent, but rather because the Court provided no guidance on navigating around the myriad of factors in the convoluted totality analyses. Part I examines two cases after Ashcroft which represent different degrees of racial vote dilution: Shirt v. Hazeltine and Session v. Perry. Through other post-Ashcroft cases, Part II teases out the differences (i) between influence districts as injury and remedy and (ii) between a jurisdiction's Section 5 and Section 2 obligations--details closely related …


After Georgia V. Ashcroft: The Primacy Of Proportionality, Felix B. Chang Jan 2005

After Georgia V. Ashcroft: The Primacy Of Proportionality, Felix B. Chang

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This Note argues that the majority in Ashcroft have left courts with an unadministerable standard-not so much for reasons that Justice Souter articulated in his dissent, but rather because the Court provided no guidance on navigating around the myriad of factors in the convoluted totality analyses. In the face of this uncertainty, lower courts will rely increasingly on the proportionality standard of Johnson v. De Grandy, which marked the midpoint in the judicial shift from Justice Brennan's worldview to Justice O'Connor's world-view. Part I examines two cases after Ashcroft which represent different degrees of racial vote dilution: Shirt v. …