Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Elected-Official-Affiliated Nonprofits: Closing The Public Integrity Gap, Richard Briffault
Elected-Official-Affiliated Nonprofits: Closing The Public Integrity Gap, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
Recent years have witnessed the growing use by elected officials, particularly state and local chief executives, of affiliated nonprofit organizations to advance their policy goals. Some of these organizations engage in public advocacy to advance a governor’s or mayor’s legislative program. Others operate more like conventional charities, raising philanthropic support for a range of governmental social welfare programs. Elected officials fundraise for these organizations, which are often staffed by close associates of those elected officials, and the organizations’ public communications frequently feature prominently the name or likeness of their elected-official sponsor. As these organizations do not engage in electioneering, they …
Lobbying And Campaign Finance: Separate And Together, Richard Briffault
Lobbying And Campaign Finance: Separate And Together, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
The relationship between lobbying and campaign finance is complex, contested, and changing. Lobbying and campaign finance are two important forms of political activity that combine money and communication in ways that have significant implications for democratic self-government. The two practices frequently interact and reinforce each other, with individuals, organizations, and interest groups deploying both lobbyists and campaign money to advance their goals. Congress, in 2007, for the first time explicitly recognized the intersection of campaign finance and lobbying when it adopted legislation specifically regulating the campaign finance activities of lobbyists. At roughly the same time, several of the leading candidates …
Bush V. Gore As An Equal Protection Case, Richard Briffault
Bush V. Gore As An Equal Protection Case, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
In Bush v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court applied the Equal Protection Clause to the mechanics of state election administration. The Court invalidated the manual recount of the so-called undervote – that is, ballots that vote-counting machinery had found contained no indication of a vote for President – which the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to determine the winner of Florida's vote for presidential electors in the 2000 presidential election. The United States Supreme Court reasoned that the principles it had previously articulated in applying the Equal Protection Clause to the vote were violated by the Florida court's …