Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Ambiguity (1)
- Anti-tax (1)
- Appropriation (1)
- Buckley v. Valeo (1)
- Budget (1)
-
- Campaign Finance Reform (1)
- Conservative (1)
- Constitutional duty (1)
- Constitutional provisions (1)
- Crisis (1)
- Editorial (1)
- Educational (1)
- Elected (1)
- Election (1)
- Electorate (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fiscal (1)
- Funding (1)
- Governor (1)
- Impasse (1)
- Initiative (1)
- Initiative process (1)
- Judicial power (1)
- Positive law (1)
- Public education (1)
- Raising (1)
- Regular (1)
- Session (1)
- State constitution (1)
- Supermajority (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Defining Democracy: The Supreme Court's Campaign Finance Dilemma, Lori A. Ringhand
Defining Democracy: The Supreme Court's Campaign Finance Dilemma, Lori A. Ringhand
Scholarly Works
On December 10, 2003 the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in McConnell v. FEC. In McConnell, the Court was asked to determine the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ("BCRA"). A divided Court, in a deeply fractured decision in which six justices wrote individual opinions, upheld the major provisions of the legislation. Yet despite the almost 300 pages of reasoning provided by the Court, and a voluminous record developed by the district court, the Justices could not agree on what purportedly is the central issue in campaign finance law: whether the challenged regulations were necessary …
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
When the Nevada Supreme Court decided Guinn v. Legislature, one would have thought from reading the popular press accounts that the court had forcibly displaced the State legislature by means of a violent coup d'etat. Newspaper accounts of the decision referred to it as a usurpation of power in violation of clear constitutional language, belittling the court in language sometimes more appropriate to the baseball bleachers than to serious editorial commentary. Following suit, politicized elements of the citizenry began a recall effort (seemingly unsuccessful as of this writing) directed at the court as well as joining the chorus of criticisms. …