Election Law Commons^™

Corruption Temptation, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

This Commentary, forthcoming in the California Law Review, is a response to Larry Lessig's Jorde Lecture, forthcoming in the same journal. I suggest that corruption is not the proper conceptual vehicle for thinking about the problems that Lessig wants us to think about. I argue that Lessig’s real concern is that, for the vast majority of citizens, wealth presents a significant barrier to political participation in the funding of campaigns. Lessig ought to discuss the wealth problem directly. I conclude with three reasons why the corruption temptation ought to be resisted.

Mapping A Post-Shelby County Contingency Strategy, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay was written for the Yale Law Journal Online Symposium on the future of section 5 of the VRA after Shelby County v. Holder. We argue that voting rights activists ought to be prepared — because of developments in constitutional law, or politics, or political practice — for a future in which section 5 is not part of the voting rights landscape. If the Court strikes down section 5, an emerging and fragile ecosystem of private entities, non-judicial institutions, and organized interest groups of various stripes, may be willing and able to mimic the elements that made section 5 an effective ...

Elección Individual, Jose Luis Sardon

Jose Luis Sardon

La gran transformación del Perú ocurrirá cuando la elección por lista sea sustituida por la elección individual de los congresistas.

The "Nixon Sabotage": The Political Origins Of The Equal Protection Challenge To The Voting Rights Act, Danieli Evans

Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice

Critics of the Voting Rights Act argue that the anti-discrimination law requires states to engage in unconstitutional discrimination, as state decisionmakers must be conscious of race in order to ensure that voting policies do not weaken minority representation. This argument relies on the idea that subjective racial motivation is the essence of unconstitutional discrimination (even if benevolent, or to promote racial inclusion). The conventional understanding among constitutional scholars is that this “search for the bigoted decisionmaker” developed in employment and housing discrimination decisions between 1976 and 1979. Previous accounts have not recognized the role that the 1971 school desegregation decision ...

Crawford V. Marion County Election Board: A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words And Exactly One Vote, Brian C. Crook

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

Section 501(C)(4) Advocacy Organizations: Political Candidate-Related And Other Partisan Activities In Furtherance Of The Social Welfare, Terence Dougherty

Seattle University Law Review

In the wake of the 2012 presidential election, tax and political law lawyers are left with a number of unanswered questions concerning the political activities of tax-exempt organizations. Despite the importance of these questions, there are striking gaps in the authority of federal tax law governing the conduct of political candidate and other partisan-related activities by tax-exempt organizations. Assuming activities in furtherance of partisan interests are activities that support private interests, I consider what this authority may tell us about the permissibility of Section 501(c)(4) organizations engaging in partisan political activities and having as a constitutive purpose a ...

The Administration Of A Republican Form Of Government (Enforcement), Edward Foley, Richard Hasen, Edwin Bender, Laughlin Mcdonald, Andrew King-Ries

Browning Symposia & Lectures

Panel on enforcement.

Symposium Introduction & The Rules Of A Republican Form Of Government (Campaign Regulation), William Marshall, Richard Pildes, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Anthony Johnstone

Browning Symposia & Lectures

Symposium Introduction by Anthony Johnstone.

Panel on campaign regulation.

Keynote Address: On What Being A (Small R) Republican Means, Lawrence Lessig

Browning Symposia & Lectures

Keynote Address by Professor Lawrence Lessig to the Montana Law Review’s Honorable James R. Browning Symposium on Election Law, The State of the Republican Form of Government in the States: Debating Democracy’s Future, held at The University of Montana School of Law on September 27, 2012.

Lawrence Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School, director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University, and founder of Rootstrikers, a network of activists leading the fight against government corruption. He has authored numerous books, including Republic, Lost: How Money ...

Evidencing A Republican Form Of Government: The Influence Of Campaign Money On State-Level Elections, Edwin Bender

Montana Law Review

Evidence compiled by the Institute over the last decade from all 50 states demonstrates that understanding the role money plays in elections and public policy development, and specifically how campaign-finances are regulated, can improve the representative forms of government in the states. If a state wants more inclusive elections—contested as well as monetarily competitive—then data shows that adjusting contribution limits or funding mechanisms can have a dramatic effect. Offering incentives for donors to participate and for candidates to seek out more small-dollar donors can also have a positive effect on both the number of candidates who run and ...

The Separation Of Electoral Powers, Edward Foley

Montana Law Review

The separation of electoral powers, as outlined in this essay, is a progression in the evolution of republican political theory. Just as Madison improved upon Montesquieu, so too is it necessary for our generation to improve upon Madison in light of our experience with the Madisonian system since the founding of our federal republic. I harbor no illusions that the system described will be adopted anytime soon. Yet aspects of this system are already being put into place, as increasing numbers of democratic republics—both American states and others abroad—adopt nonpartisan institutions for different aspects of the electoral process ...

Taking Opt-In Rights Seriously: What Knox V. Seiu Could Mean For Post-Citizens United Shareholder Rights, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy

Montana Law Review

Our nation has struggled with regulating money in politics for centuries. In the normal course of events, the political branches, the 50 states, or voters choose the contours of such regulations. Knox is remarkable because it makes the Supreme Court the source of a national paycheck protection rationale, at least in the case of special assessments for public-sector unions. But Knox raises the intriguing possibility that a future Supreme Court (instead of a state legislature or Congress) could impose a shareholder consent rule. In the meantime, the onus is on state legislatures, Congress, administrative agencies, and American voters to bring ...

The Constitutionality Of Campaign Finance Regulation: Should Differences In A State's Political History And Culture Matter?, William Marshall

Montana Law Review

In its Western Tradition Partnership decision, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that the constitutionality of state campaign finance restrictions should be reviewed with particular reference to the political history and traditions of the state enacting the regulation. In so holding, the Montana Court recognized that the states have different political cultures and that these different political cultures can lead to very different regulatory concerns. On this basis, the Montana Court concluded that a type of campaign finance restriction that may be unconstitutional when applied to national elections or to elections in one state might be constitutionally permissible when applied to ...

A Constitutional Right To Lie In Campaigns And Elections?, Richard Hasen

Montana Law Review

After Alvarez, the state may no longer have the power to ban or punish malicious false campaign speech, whether made by candidates or others. The result of this conclusion is that we are likely to see more false campaign speech in elections, including some brazen lies. With candidates’ pants increasingly on fire, and with the wooden noses of campaign consultants growing ever longer, the question is whether counterspeech—from opposing candidates, the media, and perhaps the government—will be enough to give voters the tools they need to make intelligent choices. I take solace in Jack Shafer’s depressing observation ...

Keynote Address: On What Being A (Small R) Republican Means, Lawrence Lessig

Montana Law Review

This Article is an edited, annotated transcript of the Keynote Address delivered by Professor Lawrence Lessig at the Montana Law Review’s Honorable James R. Browning Symposium on Election Law, The State of the Republican Form of Government in the States: Debating Democracy’s Future, held at The University of Montana School of Law on September 27, 2012.

Foreword: The State Of The Republican Form Of Government In Montana, Anthony Johnstone

Montana Law Review

This Volume marks an opportunity to reassess the impact of these recent federal interventions on the republican form of government in the states. As the varied contributions demonstrate, it also marks an opportunity to reassert a role for the states in reforming republicanism in the wake of Citizens United and related developments.

Considering The Gerrymander , Leroy C. Hardy

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bush V. Gore: What Happened, And What Does The Supreme Court's New Equal Protection Standard Mean For State Election Officials?, Michael Louis Newman

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Consider The Source: A Note On Public-Sector Union Expenditure Restrictions Upheld In Davenport V. Washington Education Association, Daniel A. Himebaugh

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Causal Context Of Disparate Vote Denial, Janai S. Nelson

Boston College Law Review

For nearly fifty years, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“VRA”) and its amendments have remedied racial discrimination in the electoral process with unparalleled muscularity. Modern vote denial practices that have a disparate impact on minority political participation, however, increasingly fall outside the VRA’s ambit. As judicial tolerance of disparate impact claims has waned in other areas of law, the contours of Section 2, one of the VRA’s most powerful provisions, have also narrowed to fit the shifting landscape. Section 2’s “on account of race” standard to determine discrimination in voting has evolved from one of quasi-intent ...