Election Law Commons^™

The Locked Gates To Tension City: The Commission On Presidential Debates, The Fec, And The Two-Party System, Tommy La Voy

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Since John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon walked into a Chicago television studio for the first general election presidential debate in 1960, candidate debates have been a fundamental aspect of presidential campaigns and have had broader effects on society at large. The Commission on Presidential Debates (“CPD”) has been in charge of organizing the general election debates since it was created in 1987 by the Democratic and Republican parties. In its tenure, the CPD has restricted its massive platform almost every election to the Republican and Democratic candidates through the use of criteria that seemingly follow the law’s requirement of …

Let All Voters Vote: Independents And The Expansion Of Voting Rights In The United States, Jeremy Gruber, Michael A. Hardy, Harry Kresky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Court Litigation: The New Front In The War Against Partisan Gerrymandering, Charlie Stewart

Michigan Law Review Online

Partisan gerrymandering is the process of drafting state and congressional districts in a manner that gives one political party an advantage over another. The end goal is simple: help your party win more seats or protect existing ones. The tactic is as old as the United States. In 1788, Patrick Henry convinced the Virginia state legislature to draw the 5th Congressional District to pit his rival James Madison against James Monroe. The term “gerrymander” itself is a hybrid: in 1810, democratic Governor Gerry signed a partisan redistricting plan into law—one that contained a district that infamously looked like a salamander. …

I Pledge Allegiance To The Party: Reclaiming The Associational Rights Of Independent Voters In Open Primaries, C. Alan Carrillo

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Gerrymandering And The Constitutional Norm Against Government Partisanship, Michael S. Kang

Michigan Law Review

This Article challenges the basic premise in the law of gerrymandering that partisanship is a constitutional government purpose at all. The central problem, Justice Scalia once explained in Vieth v. Jubilerer, is that partisan gerrymandering becomes unconstitutional only when it “has gone too far,” giving rise to the intractable inquiry into “how much is too much.” But the premise that partisanship is an ordinary and lawful purpose, articulated confidently as settled law and widely understood as such, is largely wrong as constitutional doctrine. The Article surveys constitutional law to demonstrate the vitality of an important, if implicit norm against …

Appellate Division, Third Department, Avella V. Batt, Danielle D'Abate

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

California Democratic Party V. Jones: Invalidation Of The Blanket Primary, Teresa Macdonald

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ratification Of Reapportionment Plans Drawn By Redistricting Commissions, Poonam Kumar

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Partisan gerrymandering is a danger that threatens the foundations of the American democratic structure. This Note argues that partisan gerrymandering must be eliminated in order to foster political competition and ensure government accountability. Without a judicial solution, redistricting commissions present a viable option to help cure the ills of partisan gerrymandering. This Note argues that automatic and mandatory state supreme court judicial review must be the process by which the redistricting plans drawn by these commissions are ratified. Automatic judicial review permits redistricting to remain a legislative task while giving the judiciary a quintessential judicial task. In addition, this Note …

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.

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 …

Felon Disenfrachisement Laws: Partisan Politics In The Legislatures, Jason Belmont Conn

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This examination of the institutional changes to state legislatures, synthesized with an analysis of the handling of felon disenfranchisement laws by state legislatures, presents a troubling realization about the law today: in the twenty-first century, partisan politics moderates decisions about even the most basic and fundamental principles of democracy. This Note suggests that because state legislators follow their party leadership and position, a state's traditional treatment of racial minorities, geographic location, and even ideology are not the strongest indicators of a state's disenfranchisement laws. Rather, partisan politics drives changes to the state laws governing felon voter eligibility.

Campaign Finance Reform And The Social Inequality Paradox, Yoav Dotan

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The recent landmark decision by the Supreme Court in McConnell v. FEC opens the way for new and more decisive regulation of the vast amounts of private and corporate money poured into the political system. However, the theoretical grounds for campaign finance regulation - as reflected in the Court's opinion - remain highly perplexing. The purpose of the current article is to tie together the evolving constitutional principle of equality in election with modern process theory and to apply them to the field of campaign finance. The inherent tension between the stringent requirement for political equality on the one hand …

Barriers To Participation, Trevor Potter, Marianne H. Viray

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Despite the nation's founding commitment to participatory democracy, many barriers to candidate and public participation in the electoral process are damaging the public's confidence that our elections are fair and open to full participation by candidates and voters.

The nominating processes created by the two major parties mainly serve the goals of party "insiders" and the more politically extreme factions, at the expense of competition and public confidence in the two-party system. At the same time, barriers to minor party and independent candidates-closed primaries, excessive early-voter registration requirements and complicated state primary and general ballot access requirements-operate to foreclose the …

Strategic Voting And African-Americans: True Vote, True Representation, True Power For The Black Community, Maxine Burkett

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

As long as American politics remain securely bound to the two-party system, Blacks will remain a voting block; a block that may shift, but a block nonetheless. And although this appears to be to our strategic disadvantage, allowing conviction to direct us, as well as a deep respect for the intense struggle for the franchise, will forever be a noble posture.

Redefining American Democracy: Do Alternative Voting Systems Capture The True Meaning Of "Representation"?, James Thomas Tucker

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This Article explores whether alternative voting systems are compatible with the meaning of representation in the United States. Part II begins by examining the role of geographical representation and the effect it has on the ability of individuals and groups of voters to give or withhold their consent. Part III follows this inquiry by assessing the relationship between representatives and constituents under majoritarian and proportional systems to determine the consequences of moving away from geographical representation towards models designed to enhance opportunities for all voters to choose winning candidates. A description of what a "majority" is and when and how …

Ballot Format: Must Candidates Be Treated Equally , Richard Winger

Cleveland State Law Review

This article's purpose is to explore and discuss a major inequality currently plaguing the realm of ballot format-the non-uniformed partisan labeling of election ballots. This will be accomplished by answering the following question: if a ballot lists partisan labels for some candidates must it list similar labels for all? This article endorses the idea that an election ballot should be fairly constructed. Governments preparing a voting ballot so its design does not significantly disadvantage any class of listed candidates seems perfectly reasonable. Despite this seemingly logical approach, some state laws provide that certain classes of candidates are entitled to preferential …

Fighting Exclusion From Televised Presidential Debates: Minor-Party Candidates' Standing To Challenge Sponsoring Organizations' Tax-Exempt Status, Gregory P. Magarian

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that courts should recognize minor-party presidential candidates' standing to challenge the section 50l(c)(3) tax-exempt status of organizations sponsoring televised debates that exclude minor-party candidates. Part I situates the issue within the context of the Supreme Court's standing jurisprudence and concludes that the validity of a third-party tax-status challenge by an aggrieved minor-party presidential candidate remains an open question. Part II analyzes the Second and District of Columbia Circuits' decisions and concludes that the Second Circuit's approach properly interprets the Supreme Court's standing doctrine and correctly resolves the particular arguments which both courts consider. Part III first demonstrates …

Affirmative Action In The Electoral Process: The Constitutionality Of The Democratic Party's Equal Division Rule, Timothy J. Hoy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this Note traces the history of affirmative action in the Democratic Party and the events preceding adoption and implementation of the equal division rule. Part II establishes that the equal division rule is subject to constitutional review. Part III presents constitutional and state statutory challenges to the equal division rule. The Note concludes that use of the equal division rule "quota" in the delegate selection process is unconstitutional.