Law Commons^™

The Problem Of Extravagant Inferences, Cass Sunstein

Georgia Law Review

Judges and lawyers sometimes act as if a constitutional or statutory term must, as a matter of semantics, be understood to have a particular meaning, when it could easily be understood to have another meaning, or several other meanings. When judges and lawyers act as if a legal term has a unique semantic meaning, even though it does not, they should be seen to be drawing extravagant inferences. Some constitutional provisions are treated this way; consider the idea that the vesting of executive power in a President of the United States necessarily includes the power to remove, at will, a …

The Voting Rights Paradox: Ideology And Incompleteness Of American Democratic Practice, Atiba R. Ellis

Georgia Law Review

This Essay describes the “voting rights paradox”—the fact
that despite America’s professed commitment to universal
enfranchisement, voting rights legislation throughout U.S.
history has arisen in some states to serve antidemocratic,
exclusionary ends. This Essay argues that this contradiction
comes into focus when the right to vote is understood as having
as an ideological driving force based on worthiness for
admission to the franchise. This ideology of worthiness persists
because the right to vote is dependent on political decisions left
to the political branches and the majority’s willingness to allow
propaganda to influence the scope of the franchise.
Ultimately, this Essay …

The New Redeemers, Anthony M. Kreis

Georgia Law Review

This Article is about the long arc of a Second Redemption. A
new life to the politics of racial grievance surfaced in the wake
of a diversifying polity, a decline of rural power, and a Black
man’s rise to the American presidency. And that reinvigorated
force was the linchpin of Donald Trump’s ascendency to power.
Trump was a part of a broader conservative governing
coalition, which held its center of gravity in rural, white
America. Leading members of that coalition feverishly eroded
democratic norms to entrench minoritarian power. They
justified their pernicious work by claiming to be the true heirs …

Keynote Speech: Walking The Line: Modern Gerrymandering And Partisanship, Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos

Georgia Law Review

INTRODUCTION I am going to be discussing an ongoing project of mine that I call hyperpartisan election law. I make three main arguments in this project. The first is that almost all of election law was created during an unusually nonpartisan period in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. Consistent with this period's very low level of partisanship, election law originally did not intend to, and did not actually have the effect, of addressing partisan cleavages. The second claim is that as the country's voters and politicians have become ever more partisan over the last generation, election law has adapted in …

The First Amendment Case Against Partisan Gerrymandering, Emmet J. Bondurant Ii, Ben W. Thorpe

Georgia Law Review

The Supreme Court recognizes that "[p]artisan
gerrymanders... [are incompatible] with democratic
principles."I This makes good sense. The fundamental
objective of redistrictingis to "establish 'fairand effective
representation for all citizens. '2 And partisan
gerrymandering-whichthe Supreme Court defines as
"drawing... district lines to subordinate adherents of
one political party and entrench a rival party in
power'--runs counter to that fundamental objective.
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court has yet to invalidate
a redistricting plan solely as an unconstitutional
partisan gerrymander. This Symposium issue of the
Georgia Law Review, however, comes at a crucial
moment in the Court's treatment of that question. A case
now …

The History Of Redistricting In Georgia, Charles S. Bullock Iii

Georgia Law Review

In his memoirs, Chief Justice Earl Warren singled out
the redistrictingcases as the most significant decisions of
his tenure on the Court., A review of the changes
redistricting introduced in Georgia supports Warren's
assessment. Not only have the obligations to equalize
populations across districts and to do so in a racially fair
manner transformed the makeup of the state's collegial
bodies, Georgia has provided the setting for multiple cases
that have defined the requirements to be met when
designing districts.
Other than the very first adjustments that occurred in
the 1960s, changes in Georgia plans had to secure
approval from …

Constitutional Preservation And The Judicial Review Of Partisan Gerrymanders, Edward B. Foley

Georgia Law Review

This Essay makes three contributions to the debate
over whether the Constitution contains a judicially
enforceable constrain on gerrymanders. First,it directly
tackles the Chief Justice'sfear of thejudiciaryappearing
partisan,observing that the same fear would exist if the
Constitution explicitly banned gerrymanders and
explaining why an implicit ban should be no less
judicially enforceable than an explicit ban under
Marbury v. Madison. Second, invoking the idea of
"institutional forbearance" in the important new book
How Democracies Die, the Essay shows how the
Elections Clause can be construed to protect
congressional districting from abuses of legislative
discretion committed by state legislatures. Together,
these …

Endorsement Clauses In A Post-White Legal System: Why These Restrictions Do Not Violate A Judicial Candidate's First Amendment Right To Free Speech, Shawna M. Portner

Georgia Law Review

Elections have remained an integral method of state
judicial appointments for over two centuries. However,
because the Founding Fathers imposed upon judges the
duty to neutrally uphold the U.S. and state constitutions,
state legislatures, per the recommendation of the ABA,
have imposed certain restrictions on the speech and
actions of judicial candidates to maintain impartiality. In
2002, the Supreme Court struck down one category of
these provisions in Republican Party of Minnesota v.
White. The Court declared Minnesota's announce clause,
which prohibited judicial candidates from voicing their
opinions on issues likely to come before the bench, to be an
unconstitutional …

Congressional End-Run: The Ignored Constraint On Judicial Review, Luke M. Milligan

Georgia Law Review

This Article identifies an untended connection between
the research of legal academics and political scientists. It
explains how recent developments in constitutional theory,
when read in good light, expose a gap in the judicial
politics literature on Supreme Court decision making. The
gap is the "congressional end-run."
End-runs occur when Congress mitigates the policy cost
of adverse judicial review through neither formal limits on
the Court's autonomy nor substitution of its constitutional

interpretationfor that of the Court, but through a different
decision which cannot, as a practical if not legal matter,
be invalidated by the Court. End-runs come in several …