Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- African Americans (1)
- Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (1)
- City of Boerne v. Flores (1)
-
- Congressional findings (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional violations (1)
- Constitutionality (1)
- Deterrence (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Elections (1)
- Electoral processes (1)
- Judicial activism (1)
- Judicial deference (1)
- Lochner v. New York (1)
- Political participation (1)
- Preclearance (1)
- Race and law (1)
- Racial discrimination (1)
- Regulation (1)
- Remedial regimes (1)
- Roberts Court (1)
- Voting Rights Amenment Act of 2014 (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Dismissing Deterrence, Ellen D. Katz
Dismissing Deterrence, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
The proposed Voting Rights Amendment Act of 20144 (VRAA)[...]’s new criteria defining when jurisdictions become subject to preclearance are acutely responsive to the concerns articulated in Shelby County[ v. Holder]. The result is a preclearance regime that, if enacted, would operate in fewer places and demand less from those it regulates. This new regime, however, would not only be more targeted and less powerful, but, curiously, more vulnerable to challenge. In fact, the regime would be more vulnerable precisely because it is so responsive to Shelby County. Some background will help us see why.
Election Law's Lochnerian Turn, Ellen D. Katz
Election Law's Lochnerian Turn, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
This panel has been asked to consider whether "the Constitution [is] responsible for electoral dysfunction."' My answer is no. The electoral process undeniably falls well short of our aspirations, but it strikes me that we should look to the Supreme Court for an accounting before blaming the Constitution for the deeply unsatisfactory condition in which we find ourselves.