Law Commons^™

Chief Justice John Roberts: Institutionalist Or Hubris-In-Chief?, Eric J. Segall

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The conventional wisdom among Supreme Court scholars and commentators is that Chief Justice John Roberts is an institutionalist who cares deeply about both his personal legacy and the Supreme Court’s prestige over time. This essay challenges that belief. While the Chief certainly cares about how the Court is perceived by the public, as do most of the justices, what most defines Roberts is his hubris—not a concern for the Court’s legitimacy or even his own place in history. Across the vast landscape of constitutional law, Roberts has distorted precedent and ignored text and history to further his own policy preferences. …

Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal To Improve The United States Supreme Court, Eric J. Segall

Pepperdine Law Review

Over the last twenty-five years, some of the most significant Supreme Court decisions involving issues of national significance like abortion, affirmative action, and voting rights were five-to-four decisions. In February 2016, the death of Justice Antonin Scalia turned the nine-Justice court into an eight-Justice court, comprised of four liberal and four conservative Justices, for the first time in our nation’s history. This article proposes that an evenly divided court consisting of eight Justices is the ideal Supreme Court composition. Although the other two branches of government have evolved over the years, the Supreme Court has undergone virtually no significant changes. …

Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, And The Inherent Unfairness To The “Un-United” American Citizen, Christopher J. Kantor

Writing Across the Curriculum

Among contemporary United States Supreme Court rulings that have impacted the structure of our nation, the 2010 case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission resulted in significant political campaign finance reform that gave rise to an election system influenced by money, corporations, and powerful individuals. The ruling of Citizens United allows for the unlimited spending of corporations and labor unions on political expenditures and the limited disclosures of these campaign donors. This overturned precedent established in the 1990 case Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the 2003 case McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, the respective rulings of which …

Profile In Public Integrity: Karl Racine, Center For The Advancement Of Public Integrity

Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity (Inactive)

Attorney General Karl A. Racine is the first elected Attorney General of the District of Columbia. With his inauguration at the beginning of 2015, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) began an era of independence for the agency and accountability to District residents. As the chief legal officer for the District of Columbia, Attorney General Racine relies on his prior legal and leadership experience as a public defender and the first African-American managing partner of a top-100 US law firm, Venable LLP, to advise the Mayor and District agencies, defend the city in court and use the law to …

How Big Money Ruined Public Life In Wisconsin, Lynn Adelman

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article discusses how Wisconsin fell from grace. Once a model good government state that pioneered many democracy-enhancing laws, in a very short time, Wisconsin became a state where special interest money, most of which is undisclosed, dominates politics. This Article identifies several factors as being critical to Wisconsin’s descent. These include the state’s failure to nurture and build on the campaign finance reforms enacted in the 1970s and both the state’s and the United States Supreme Court’s failure to adequately regulate sham issue ads. As evidence of Wisconsin’s diminished status, this Article describes how several of the state’s most …

Constitutional Barriers To Congressional Reform, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Americans celebrate our Constitution as a beacon that can guide us through difficult situations. And justly so. But at times, the Constitution also has stood as a barrier to necessary reform.

Anti-Regulatory Absolutism In The Campaign Arena: Citizens United And The Implied Slippery Slope, James A. Gardner

James Gardner

No abstract provided.

Protecting The Viability Of The Small Donor In Modern Elections, Ben Miller

Arkansas Law Review

Campaign finance reform stands as one of the most important issues in today’s modern elections. From national to municipal contests, the influx of large donations places wealthy individuals—and interests—at odds with the average voter. Over the years, volumes of academic and legislative reforms have been proposed that encompass a wide range of electoral subject matter. From Citizens United to Federal Elections Commission (FEC) control mechanisms, solutions on how to change our campaign finance regulatory regime cover a large and diverse area of law and policy. However, the central theme throughout these reforms is maximizing transparency and curbing the undue influence …

Constitutional Law—Why Amending The Consitution To Overrule Citizens United Is The Wrong Way To Fix Campaign Finance In The United States, Zachary Hale

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mccutcheon V. Federal Election Commission And The Supreme Court's Narrowed Definition Of Corruption, Mikala L. Noe

Maine Law Review

On June 17, 1972, five men were caught attempting to bug the offices of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate complex in Washington D.C. The first link between this break-in and President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign funds was discovered when a $25,000 cashier’s check, earmarked for Nixon’s re-election fund, was found to have been deposited into the bank account of one of the men involved in the break-in. Shortly thereafter, reporters revealed that then U.S. Attorney General John N. Mitchell controlled a secret campaign fund used to gather information about the Democratic Party. During the resulting Watergate investigation, the …

A New Frontier In Campaign Finance Regulation, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, the United States Supreme Court has taken what many regard as a doctrinaire approach to campaign finance regulation. It has seized on the indisputable proposition that limits on campaign expenditures and contributions implicate important First Amendment values and, pressing the proposition to logical extremes, invalidated a number of federal and state laws that had imposed such limits.

This newspaper editorial discusses recently proposed legislation in the state of New Hampshire that would collect fees on expenditures made by individual political candidates, PACs, and Super PACS. The collected fees would be used to help the state justice department …

The Threat Of Independent Political Spending To Democratic Life -- And A Plan To Stop It, Bruce Ledewitz

Cleveland State Law Review

Ledewitz argues that it is independent spending, rather than campaign donations in general, that threatens to undermine the nature of elections. Independent spending takes away debates and decisions from candidates and voters and empowers organizations that are, because of non-coordination requirements, independent and politically irresponsible. To deal with this immediate threat, the author proposes the elimination of all contribution limits to candidates for office, which would greatly inhibit independent spending. The Article opens in Part I with the legal history and current status of independent political spending. Then, in Part II, the Article shows how independent spending threatens democracy more …

Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia

Scholarly Works

There are seismic changes going on in the political system. The United States Supreme Court has constitutionalized the concentration of political power in the "one percent" in several recent decisions, including Citizens United v. FEC. At the same time, unions are representing a shrinking share of the workforce, and their political power is also being diminished. In order for unions to recalibrate the balance of political power at all, they must collaborate with grassroots community groups, as they have done in several recent campaigns. There are, however, various legal structures that make coordination between unions and nonunion groups difficult, …

Contracting Around "Citizens United", Ganesh Sitaraman

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC is widely considered a major roadblock for campaign finance reform, and particularly for limiting third party spending in federal elections. In response to the decision, commentators, scholars, and activists have outlined a wide range of legislative and regulatory proposals to limit the influence of third party spending, including constitutional amendments, public financing programs, and expanded disclosure rules. To date, however, they have not considered the possibility that third party spending can be restrained by a self-enforcing private contract between the opposing campaigns. This Essay argues that private ordering, rather than public …

Interview With Ernest F. “Fritz” Hollings By Andrea L’Hommedieu, Ernest 'Fritz' F. Hollings

George J. Mitchell Oral History Project

Biographical Note
Ernest F. “Fritz” Hollings served in WWII, represented Charleston in the S.C. House, 1949-1954, and served as Lt. Governor and Governor, 1955-1963, and U.S. Senator, 1966-2005. In the House, he supported anti-lynching legislation, a sales tax for education, an increase in teacher salaries, and unemployment compensation reform. He went after industrial interests as Lt. Governor and built on this success as Governor. He worked to improve the state's educational system at all levels, develop industry, and balance the budget. As Senator, he cultivated a lasting interest and devotion to issues including campaign financing, international trade, public education, space …

Free Speech And Quid Pro Quo: The Case Of Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club Pac V. Bennett, Wes Larsen

Wes Larsen

One of the most pressing issues attached to any political race is the need for campaign finance reform. This necessity is especially urgent for governments that have suffered from intense political scandals, such as those that occurred in Arizona during the latter part of the last century. To curb future political corruption, Arizona passed the Arizona Citizens Clean Election Act of 1998, which set specific limitations on private campaign spending and implemented trigger mechanisms to cut off public funding for state office candidates upon use of private funds.

As practical as the Arizona law may have been, however, the U.S. …

Putting Watergate Behind Us: Salinas, Sun-Diamond, And Two Views Of The Anticorruption Model, George D. Brown

George D. Brown

A central question in the ongoing debate over the future of the American political system is how to deal with public corruption. This Article first examines the dominant theme of the last thirty years: a relatively hard-line approach that Professor Brown refers to as the post-watergate concensus. In recent years, however, this approach has been subject to growing criminalization of government ethics; Professor Brown then turns to what can be viewed as the counterrevolutionary critique. Against this background, he considers the United States Supreme Court's contribution to the debate. Starting with the recent Sun-Diamond and Salinas cases, and drawing from …

Corruption, Clients, And Political Machines: A Response To Professor Issacharoff, Stephen E. Sachs

Stephen E. Sachs

Responding to Samuel Issacharoff, On Political Corruption, 124 Harv. L. Rev. 118 (2010) In his comment on political corruption, Professor Samuel Issacharoff questions traditional accounts that aim to squeeze money out of politics entirely. Instead, he focuses on the danger that political spending will promote private influence over government policy. In this response, Professor Stephen E. Sachs argues that "private influence" is itself too broad a category to control, and that campaign finance policy should be restricted to a more manageable scope. Professor Sachs argues that if protecting the government from private influence is too diffuse a goal, we can …

The Marginality Of Citizens United, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Corporations, Corruption, And Complexity: Campaign Finance After Citizens United, Richard Briffault

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

The Post-Citizens United Fantasy-Land, Roy A. Schotland

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Of Benedick And Beatrice: Citizens United And The Reign Of The Laggard Court, Justin J. Wert, Ronald Keith Gaddie, Charles S. Bullock Iii

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Anti-Regulatory Absolutism In The Campaign Arena: Citizens United And The Implied Slippery Slope, James A. Gardner

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Judging The Justices: A Critical Analysis Of Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Cassandra Gurrola

CMC Senior Theses

This thesis examines the recently decided Supreme Court case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The case regards campaign finance reform, and has raised significant controversy recently. This thesis will evaluate the arguments from both the dissent and the majority opinions, contextualize these arguments with respect to the history of campaign finance reform and the history of the legislation with regard to corporations, and will ultimately pass judgment on whether the Court was correct in its decision. Implications for the post-Citizens world will also be considered.

Campaign Speech Law With A Twist: When The Government Is The Speaker, Not The Regulator, Helen Norton

Publications

Although government entities frequently engage in issue-related campaign speech on a variety of contested ballot and legislative measures, this fact has been entirely overlooked in contemporary First Amendment debates over campaign speech law specifically and government speech more generally. The Supreme Court's "campaign speech" and "government speech" dockets have focused to date on claims by private parties that the government has restricted or silenced their speech in violation of the First Amendment. In contrast, disputes over what this Article calls "governmental campaign speech" involve Free Speech Clause and other challenges by private parties who seek instead to silence the government's …

Interview With Sandy Maisel By Mike Hastings, L. Sandy Maisel

George J. Mitchell Oral History Project

Biographical Note
Louis "Sandy" Maisel was born on October 25, 1945, in Buffalo, New York. He attended Harvard, where he became involved with various campus and political organizations, and Columbia University, where he earned his Ph.D. in political science. In 1971 he settled in Maine, working on Bill Hathaway’s campaign for Senate, teaching at Colby College, and volunteering for Maine Democrats, including George Mitchell. In 1977, Maisel was the research director for the House Commission on Administrative Review. In 1978, he ran unsuccessfully in the congressional primary in Maine. At the time of this interview he was professor of government …

Interview With Bob Rozen (1) By Diane Dewhirst, Robert 'Bob' M. Rozen

George J. Mitchell Oral History Project

Biographical Note
Robert Martin “Bob” Rozen was born on December 11, 1955, in Richmond, Kentucky, to Morris and Rosalyn (Eilenberg) Rozen. He majored in Soviet studies at Miami University (Ohio), graduating in 1977; he earned his law degree at George Washington University. He interned for Senator Wendell Ford as a legislative assistant for the Senate Finance Committee and then continued to work for him after law school. He also earned a master’s in tax law from Georgetown University. He worked on Senator Mitchell’s staff addressing tax, trade, and financial service issues.

Summary
Interview includes discussion of: Rozen’s working for Wendell …

Interview With Fred Wertheimer By Diane Dewhirst, Fred Wertheimer

George J. Mitchell Oral History Project

Biographical Note
Fred Wertheimer was born on January 9, 1939, in Brooklyn, New York. He is a graduate of the University of Michigan and Harvard Law School. From 1981 to 1995 he served as president of Common Cause, a nonpartisan citizens’ lobby, and he worked with Senator Mitchell on campaign finance reform issues while he was president of Common Cause. At the time of this interview he was president of Democracy 21, a nonprofit organization that promotes the government reform of campaign finance, lobbying, and ethics. He is married to Linda Wertheimer, the senior national correspondent for National Public Radio. …

Interview With Dale Bumpers By Brien Williams, Dale L. Bumpers

George J. Mitchell Oral History Project

Biographical Note
Dale L. Bumpers was born on August 12, 1925, in Charleston, Arkansas. He attended the University of Arkansas, and during World War II he served in the U.S. Marine Corps. After being discharged, he attended Northwestern University Law School in Evanston, Illinois, where he received his law degree in 1951. He then returned to Charleston, Arkansas, where he began practicing law the following year. He ran for the state House in 1962 but lost. In 1970, he made a successful run for governor of Arkansas. He was elected to the U.S. States Senate in 1974, where he served …

Remembering Democracy In The Debate Over Election Reform, Matthew Michael Calabria

Duke Law Journal

In FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., the United States Supreme Court held that the federal Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act violated the First Amendment right to free speech because the statute restricted a form of political speech known as issue advocacy. In attempting to protect this right from government intrusion, however, the Court improperly excluded considerations of democracy from its free speech analysis. The opinion consequently misrepresented the nature of the right to free speech for two independent but related reasons. First, because preserving a well-functioning democracy is the primary reason free speech is protected, the right to free …