Law Commons^™

Democratic Erosion And The United States Supreme Court, Jenny Breen

Utah Law Review

For many decades, confidence in American institutions and political culture consistently led scholars to sideline questions about “regime change” in the United States. And for many years, that approach seemed justified. Democratic institutions were firmly rooted and stable, and American voters participated in free and fair elections that resulted in the peaceful transfer of power between parties and candidates. Then came the campaign of Donald Trump and all that has followed since, including open challenges to the most basic and fundamental democratic norms. These changes have led many voters, commentators, and scholars to ask: Is democracy eroding in the United …

Co-Managers? The Need For Clarification Regarding State And Federal Powers In Federal Elections, Amber Mccomas

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article argues that the Court needs to clarify the distinction between the state and federal government’s roles in federal elections to avoid chaos and unconstitutional overreach. As a part of this clarification, the Court should also clarify how information is deemed “necessary.” This article looks specifically at one potential consideration: public fears regarding election security. Data and logic indicate that such fears should not be a consideration in the necessity determination as they are unreliable. Section II examines the background of the Election Assistance Commission, the applicable law, as well as criticism and support the agency has received since …

Redefining “No Evidence Of A Breach” In Election Security, Yunsieg P. Kim

SMU Law Review Forum

For legal purposes, we rightly understand the lack of evidence to mean a lack of existence. For example, many candidates in the 2022 elections baselessly claimed that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. But, absent evidence of systemic fraud, the law correctly determines that President Biden was duly elected. If the law entertained any outlandish assertion regardless of evidentiary support, accusers could peddle whatever claims they please, forcing the accused to disprove them. Similar to the legal understanding of “no evidence,” many appear to believe that no evidence of a security breach in our voting equipment indicates no breach. For …

Keeping The Faith: How The Fourteenth Amendment Should Protect Against Faithless Electors, Jennifer A. Cranmer

Akron Law Review

Every four years, citizens across the United States vote for a presidential candidate. However, those citizens are actually voting for electors who then vote for the president in the Electoral College on the citizens’ behalf. Electors become faithless when they do not vote for the candidate that they were pledged to vote for. In Chiafalo v. Washington, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of states enacting strict faithless elector laws that require electors to vote for the candidates they were pledged to vote for and impose penalties on electors who fail to do so. Yet many states have failed …

Voter Due Process And The "Independent" State Legislature, Michael P. Bellis

Northwestern University Law Review

In a series of opinions surrounding the 2020 presidential election, multiple U.S. Supreme Court Justices broke from precedent to signal support of the “independent state legislature theory” (ISLT), a formerly obscure interpretation of state legislatures’ power over the administration of federal elections. Proponents of the ISLT allege that the U.S. Constitution grants state legislatures plenary power in federal election contexts—including the power to discount ballots, redraw legislative maps, or appoint alternative slates of presidential electors. Although the Court denied certiorari in each case, across the denials four current Justices dissented because they considered the ISLT to be a proper interpretation …

Election Administration Concerns Meet Claims Of A Fraudulent Election: A Comprehensive Analysis Of The 2020 Presidential Election And Its Aftermath In Wisconsin, Joe Franke

Marquette Law Review

The 2020 presidential election unearthed valid questions about how the election was administered and whether various state laws were properly followed. However, President Donald Trump and his closest allies routinely fail to distinguish between questions about whether state officials correctly interpreted and applied the state’ s election code and actual fraud or malfeasance. There is a significant difference between accusing election officials of wrongly interpreting state law or incorrectly implementing election procedures, and alleging that those same officials intended to rig the outcome. Failure to make this distinction has contributed to the stolen election narrative, which continues to roil the …

Rounding Up The Three-Fifths Clause: Eradicating Prison Gerrymandering In The South, Abigail N. Falk

Pepperdine Law Review

This Comment examines the phenomenon of prison gerrymandering, a practice that involves counting prisoners as residents of the counties where their state correctional facilities are located—rather than in their home communities—for redistricting and representational purposes. This practice of counting inflates the voting power of rural, white districts with large prison complexes and diminishes the voting power of minority communities. Prison gerrymandering has become especially pervasive across southern states while many of the South’s northern counterparts have eradicated this practice through legislative reform. This Comment proposes a solution to stop prison gerrymandering in the South, arguing a strategy to produce a …

Gaping Gaps In The History Of The Independent State Legislature Doctrine: Mcpherson V. Blacker, Usurpation, And The Right Of The People To Choose Their President, Mark Bonhorst, Michael W. Fitzgerald, Aviam Soifer

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

The so-called independent state legislature doctrine was the jurisprudential heart of the effort by former President Trump and allies to overturn the 2020 presidential election and was featured in the briefs for Texas v. Pennsylvania. The idea that state legislatures might have power to intervene against the popular vote for the electoral college helped animate the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Frighteningly, at the very end of the 2021 Term, the Supreme Court accepted review of a North Carolina case—Moore v. Harper—in which Republican Party legislators invoked the independent state legislature doctrine to contend that state legislators …

An Avenue For Corruption: Super Pacs And The Common Vendor Loophole, Matt Choi

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

In their campaign efforts, Super PACs and political candidates often engage professional media agencies or political consulting firms to aid them in production and placement of advertisements on media outlets, planning of advertising efforts, and planning campaign strategy. But an increasing number of Super PACs have taken to hiring the same media agencies and consulting firms as the candidates they support. Through the use of a so-called “common vendor,” Super PACs and their supported candidates can coordinate advertising strategies with each other without triggering the federal limits on spending and fundraising.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the public must …

The Ghost Of John Hart Ely, Ryan D. Doerfler, Samuel Moyn

Vanderbilt Law Review

The ghost of John Hart Ely haunts the American liberal constitutional imagination. Despite the failure long ago of any progressive constitutional vision in an increasingly conservative Supreme Court, Ely’s conjectures about the superiority of judges relative to legislatures in the protection of minorities and the policing of the democratic process remain second nature. Indeed, they have been credible enough among liberals to underwrite an anxious or even hostile attitude toward judicial reform. In order to exorcise Ely’s ghost and lay it to rest, this Article challenges his twin conjectures. First, the Article argues that there is little historical and no …

Challenging The Challengers: How Partisan Citizen Observers Contribute To Disenfranchisement And Undermine Election Integrity, Kate Uyeda

Vanderbilt Law Review

Almost every state allows political parties to sponsor and train private citizens to serve as election observers and sometimes even to challenge the eligibility of other private citizens to vote. These partisan citizen observers, referred to in this Note as “PCOs,” have far too often perpetuated the racism, disenfranchisement, and discrimination that already plague our democratic processes. While election observers can play a valuable role in preserving and maintaining the integrity of our elections at all levels, existing regulations do not effectively guard against discriminatory or intimidating PCO behavior. This Note analyzes the social and legal harms that may result …

One Vote, Two Votes, Three Votes, Four: How Ranked Choice Voting Burdens Voting Rights And More, Brandon Bryer

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reifying Anderson-Burdick: Voter Protection In The Time Of Pandemic And Beyond, Keeley Gogul

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech Has Gotten Very Expensive: Rethinking Political Speech Regulation In A Post-Truth World, John A. Barrett, Jr.

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Protecting free speech has been a foundational principle of American democracy since the nation’s founding. A core element of free speech has long been a prohibition on regulating political speech. The principle behind this protection holds that citizens are free to make whatever political pronouncements they wish and that their speech shall remain free from government suppression. Even within the limited exceptions to unfettered political speech, like defamation or libel, the speech is not banned but may merely result in liability. A premise underlying this view is that competing viewpoints, by being made available to us all, will allow …

Undue Deference To States In The 2020 Election Litigation, Joshua A. Douglas

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

COVID-19 has wreaked havoc on so much of our lives, including how to run our elections. Yet the federal courts have refused to respond appropriately to the dilemma that many voters faced when trying to participate in the 2020 election. Instead, the courts—particularly the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal appellate courts—invoked a narrow test that unduly defers to state election administration and fails to protect adequately the fundamental right to vote.

In constitutional litigation, a law usually must satisfy a two-part test: (1) does the state have an appropriate reason for the law and (2) is the law properly …

The Legislative Formation Of The Temporary Law Of The Parliament Elections, An Analytical And Critical Study, Eid Ah. Alhosban, Abeer Ba. Dababneh

UAEU Law Journal

The legislative drafting of any law is a standard for judging the adequacy of this law; the more marked the drafting of legislative precision and discipline of the law, the more responsive this law will be to the requirements of society, and the more equitable and effective it will be. The temporary 9/ 2010 Law of Election to the House of Deputies is one of the most important political laws that bear sensitivity to the popularity basis, where the outcome of a House of Deputies is able to carry out its constitutional duties in terms of oversight and legislation.

With …

Presidential Control Of Elections, Lisa M. Manheim

Vanderbilt Law Review

In recent decades, presidents of both political parties have asserted increasingly aggressive forms of influence over the administrative state. During this same period, Congress has expanded the role that the federal government plays in election administration. The convergence of these two trends leads to a troubling but underexamined phenomenon: presidential control of elections. Relying on their official powers, presidents have the ability to affect the rules that govern elections, including elections meant to check and legitimize presidential powers in the first place. This self-serving arrangement heightens the risk of harms from political entrenchment and subordination of expertise. These harms, in …

Wisconsin’S 3/5 Compromise: Prison Gerrymandering In Wisconsin Dilutes Minority Votes To Inflate White Districts’ Population, Adam Johnson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Don't Change The Subject: How State Election Laws Can Nullify Ballot Questions, Cole Gordner

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Procedural election laws regulate the conduct of state elections and provide for greater transparency and fairness in statewide ballots. These laws ensure that the public votes separately on incongruous bills and protects the electorate from uncertainties contained in omnibus packages. As demonstrated by a slew of recent court cases, however, interest groups that are opposed to the objective of a ballot question are utilizing these election laws with greater frequency either to prevent a state electorate from voting on an initiative or to overturn a ballot question that was already decided in the initiative’s favor. This practice is subverting the …

Weaponizing The Ballot, Derek T. Muller

Florida State University Law Review

State legislatures are considering passing laws to prevent presidential candidates from appearing on the ballot if they fail to disclose their tax returns. These proposals exceed the states' power under the Elections Clause and the Presidential Electors Clause. States have no power to add qualifications to presidential or congressional candidates. But states do have constitutional authority to regulate the manner of holding elections and to direct the manner of appointing presidential electors. "Manner" regulations that relate to the ballot are those that affect the integrity and reliability of the electoral process itself or that require a preliminary showing of substantial …

Democracy, Deference, And Compromise: Understanding And Reforming Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Scott P. Bloomberg

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In Citizens United, the Supreme Court interpreted the government’s interest in preventing corruption as being limited to preventing quid pro quo— cash-for-votes—corruption. This narrow interpretation drastically circumscribed legislatures’ abilities to regulate the financing of elections, in turn prompting scholars to propose a number of reforms for broadening the government interest in campaign finance cases. These reforms include urging the Court to recognize a new government interest such as political equality, to adopt a broader understanding of corruption, and to be more deferential to legislatures in defining corruption.

Building upon that body of scholarship, this Article begins with a descriptive …

Challenging Congress's Single-Member District Mandate For U.S. House Elections On Political Association Grounds, Austin Plier

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Superfluous Fifteenth Amendment?, Travis Crum

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article starts a conversation about reorienting voting rights doctrine toward the Fifteenth Amendment. In advancing this claim, I explore an unappreciated debate—the “Article V debate”—in the Fortieth Congress about whether nationwide black suffrage could and should be achieved through a statute, a constitutional amendment, or both. As the first significant post-ratification discussion of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Article V debate provides valuable insights about the original public understandings of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and the distinction between civil and political rights.

The Article V debate reveals that the Radical Republicans’ initial proposal for nationwide black suffrage included both …

Passive Voter Suppression: Campaign Mobilization And The Effective Disfranchisement Of The Poor, Bertrall L. Ross Ii, Douglas M. Spencer

Northwestern University Law Review

A recent spate of election laws tightened registration rules, reduced convenient voting opportunities, and required voters to show specific types of identification in order to vote. Because these laws make voting more difficult, critics have analogized them to Jim Crow Era voter suppression laws.

We challenge the analogy that current restrictive voting laws are a reincarnation of Jim Crow Era voter suppression. While there are some notable similarities, the analogy obscures a more apt comparison to a different form of voter suppression—one that operates to effectively disfranchise an entire class of people, just as the old form did for African …

Keynote Address: Judging The Political And Political Judging: Justice Scalia As Case Study, Richard L. Hasen

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This is a revised version of a Keynote Address delivered at “The Supreme Court and American Politics,” a symposium held October 17, 2017 at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. In this Address, Professor Hasen considers through the lens of Justice Scalia’s opinions the role that views of the political process play, at least rhetorically, in how Supreme Court Justices decide cases. It focuses on Justice Scalia’s contradictory views on self-dealing and incumbency protection across a range of cases, comparing campaign finance on the one hand to partisan gerrymandering, voter identification laws, political patronage, and ballot access rules on the other. …

Taking Judicial Legitimacy Seriously, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Chief Justice Roberts appears worried about judicial legitimacy. In Gill v. Whitford, the Wisconsin gerrymandering case, he explicitly worries about the message the Court would send if it wades into the gerrymandering debate. More explicitly, he worries about “the status and integrity” of the Court if is seen as taking sides in politically charged controversies. Similarly, during his confirmation hearing, Roberts warned that the Court has a limited role in our constitutional scheme and must stay within it. To decide cases on the basis of policy and not law would compromise the Court’s legitimacy. This Essay is skeptical. For one, …

The Consequences Of Citizens United: What Do The Lawyers Say?, Ann Southworth

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Essay examines a polarized world of advocacy over campaign finance regulation in the Roberts Court. It considers what lawyers who filed party and amicus briefs in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission have to say about the consequences of the decision. It shows that the lawyers generally agree about the ruling’s direct consequences but strongly disagree about whether those consequences are good or bad for the country and what lessons the public should draw. This Essay also explores the competing frames that these lawyers bring to questions about money in politics and their competing perspectives about government and where …

I Pledge Allegiance To The Party: Reclaiming The Associational Rights Of Independent Voters In Open Primaries, C. Alan Carrillo

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Current State Of Election Law In The United States, Mark Rush

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Ballot Selfies: Balancing The Right To Speak Out On Political Issues And The Right To Vote Free From Improper Influence And Coercion, Isidora Koutsoulias

Journal of Law and Policy

Courts and legislatures face the difficult task of balancing individual First Amendment rights with other basic freedoms, a task that has become increasingly challenging with the advent of new technology. The emergence of the ballot selfie has caused a legal uproar due to the perception that it may compromise the sanctity of the electoral process and the secret ballot process by facilitating vote buying and coercion. Consequently, several states have enacted laws that prohibit most or all ballot selfies. However, many individuals have rightfully protested these laws as an unreasonable restraint on freedom of speech. This Note argues that although …