Election Law Commons^™

Voting Rights And The Electoral Process: Resolving Representation Issues Due To Felony Disenfranchisement And Prison Gerrymandering, Andrew Calabrese, Tim Gordon, Tianyi Lu

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

A Modern-Day 3/5 Compromise: The Case For Finding Prison Gerrymandering Unconstitutional Under The Thirteenth Amendment, Shana Iden

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Vestiges of slavery and systemic disenfranchisement of people of color persist in the United States. One of these remnants is the practice of prison gerrymandering, which occurs when government officials count incarcerated individuals as part of the population of the prison’s location rather than the individual’s home district. This Article argues that prison gerrymandering functions as a badge of slavery that should be prohibited under the Thirteenth Amendment.

First, this Article provides background on prison gerrymandering and charts its impact through history, particularly on Black communities. Moreover, this Article analyzes how litigation under the Fourteenth Amendment has not yielded meaningful …

Taking History Seriously: Marjorie Taylor Greene, Reflections On Progressive Lawyering, And Section 3 Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Andrew G. Celli Jr.

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

History has lessons to teach, and lawyers can learn from and use history in ways other than by cherry-picking from it. This Article contends that, while American history may be vexed, progressive lawyers can fully embrace history and hold it up into the light for consideration, all in service of progressive ends.

This Article describes a recent litigation that illustrates the point. In March 2022, the Author, together with other lawyers and a non-partisan pro-democracy group, represented voters from Georgia’s fourteenth congressional district in their effort to disqualify U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from the Georgia ballot—based upon Section 3 …

Updating Anderson-Burdick To Evaluate Partisan Election Manipulation, Andrew Vazquez

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

This Article analyzes jurisprudence concerning the judicial review of election laws. It suggests that the United States Supreme Court’s approach should acknowledge the realities of political partisanship when reviewing challenged laws and regulations. Specifically, this Article proposes a judicial test to evaluate election laws for partisan biases using factors modeled on those employed by the Court in Gingles v. Thornburg. Simply put, the manipulation of election laws to pursue partisan advantages poses the greatest threat to our democracy. Accordingly, this Article concludes that protecting our democracy from election practices that benefit one party over another in the guise of …