Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Inc. v. Comer; Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar (1)
- Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission; Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue; Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia (1)
- Roberts Court; Politics; Legitimacy; State Courts; State Constitutions; institutions; Supreme Court; Liberal; Conservative; Judicial Review; Masterpiece Cakeshop (1)
- Voter ID; vote; voting law; Harper; legal financial obligation; disfranchisement; LFO; Anderson-Burdick; Section 10; Voting Rights Act; VRA; Jim Crow; discrimination; Equal Protection; Fourteenth Amendment; Crawford; provisional ballot; constitutional law; Twenty-Fourth Amendment; poll tax; ballot access; Harman; Celebrezze; election; Shelby County; Fifteenth Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Roberts Court, State Courts, And State Constitutions: Judicial Role Shopping, Ariel L. Bendor, Joshua Segev
The Roberts Court, State Courts, And State Constitutions: Judicial Role Shopping, Ariel L. Bendor, Joshua Segev
Journal of Law and Policy
In this Article we reveal a dual dilemma, both material and institutional, that the Supreme Court in its current composition faces when reviewing liberal state court decisions based on the state constitution. The Article further describes substantive and procedural tactics that the Court adopts to address this dilemma, and illustrates the arguments by analyzing a number of recent Supreme Court decisions. The two dilemmas, the combination of which serve as a “power multiplier,” of sorts, have arisen following the last three appointments to the Supreme Court, which resulted in a solid majority of conservative Justices nominated by Republican presidents. One …
“A Dollar Ain’T Much If You’Ve Got It”: Freeing Modern-Day Poll Taxes From Anderson-Burdick, Lydia Saltzbart
“A Dollar Ain’T Much If You’Ve Got It”: Freeing Modern-Day Poll Taxes From Anderson-Burdick, Lydia Saltzbart
Journal of Law and Policy
How much should it cost to vote in the United States? The answer is clear from the Supreme Court’s landmark opinion in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections—nothing. Yet more than fifty years later, many U.S. voters must jump over financial hurdles to access the franchise. These hurdles have withstood judicial review because the Court has drifted away from Harper and has instead applied the more deferential Anderson-Burdick analysis to modern poll tax claims—requiring voters to demonstrate how severely the cost burdens them. As a result, direct and indirect financial burdens on the vote have proliferated. Millions of voters …