Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Universitas Indonesia (445)
- Seattle University School of Law (190)
- University of Michigan Law School (33)
- Notre Dame Law School (10)
- University of Richmond (10)
-
- Fordham Law School (6)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (5)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (5)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (4)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (4)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (4)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- Florida International University College of Law (2)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- St. Mary's University (2)
- UIC School of Law (2)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (2)
- University of Kentucky (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Association of American Law Schools (1)
- Beirut Arab University (1)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Colby College (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Cornell University Law School (1)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Voting Rights Act (21)
- United States Supreme Court (18)
- Constitution (17)
- Elections (17)
- Voting (17)
-
- Congress (16)
- Supreme Court (14)
- Discrimination (13)
- Judicial review (13)
- Law (13)
- Election law (10)
- Racial discrimination (9)
- Race and law (8)
- Shelby County v. Holder (8)
- Voting practices (8)
- Gerrymandering (7)
- Preclearance (7)
- Remedial regimes (7)
- SFFA (7)
- Affirmative Action (6)
- African Americans (6)
- Campaign finance (6)
- Constitutional violations (6)
- ESG (6)
- First Amendment (6)
- Supreme Court of the United States (6)
- Bush v. Gore (5)
- Citizenship (5)
- Courts (5)
- Democracy (5)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan (445)
- Seattle University Law Review (188)
- Articles (13)
- Michigan Law Review (13)
- University of Richmond Law Review (10)
-
- Court Briefs (6)
- Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum (5)
- Journal Articles (5)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (5)
- Northwestern University Law Review (4)
- Touro Law Review (4)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (4)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- Cardozo Law Review (2)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- FIU Law Review (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Seattle Journal for Social Justice (2)
- The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice (2)
- UIC Law Review (2)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- BAU Journal - Journal of Legal Studies - مجلة الدراسات القانونية (1)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (1)
- Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal (1)
- Cardozo Law Review de•novo (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 721 - 750 of 765
Full-Text Articles in Election Law
Causation Or Correlation? The Impact Of Lulac V. Clements On Section 2 Lawsuits In The Fifth Circuit, Elizabeth M. Ryan
Causation Or Correlation? The Impact Of Lulac V. Clements On Section 2 Lawsuits In The Fifth Circuit, Elizabeth M. Ryan
Michigan Law Review
Under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, illegal vote dilution exists when an electoral standard, practice, or procedure results in a denial or abridgement of the right to vote on account of race or color Plaintiffs demonstrate vote dilution by introducing evidence regarding a variety of objective factors, including whether voting in the jurisdiction in question is polarized along racial lines. In 1993, the Fifth Circuit adopted a new standard for section 2 plaintiffs trying to prove racially polarized voting. The Fifth Circuit held that demonstrating a mere correlation between race and vote was insufficient to establish racially polarized …
From Bush V. Gore To Namudno: A Response To Professor Amar, Ellen D. Katz
From Bush V. Gore To Namudno: A Response To Professor Amar, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
In his Dunwody Lecture, Professor Akhil Amar invites us to revisit the Bush v. Gore controversy and consider what went wrong. This short essay responds to Professor Amar by taking up his invitation and looking at the decision through a seemingly improbable lens, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last June in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One (NAMUDNO) v. Holder. Among its many surprises, NAMUDNO helps illuminate the Court’s fundamental error nine years ago. Professor Amar forcefully argues that the mistrust with which the Justices in the Bush v. Gore majority viewed the Florida Supreme Court was both unjustified …
Withdrawal: The Roberts Court And The Retreat From Election Law, Ellen D. Katz
Withdrawal: The Roberts Court And The Retreat From Election Law, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Last Term the Supreme Court handed down four decisions that upheld diverse efforts by state governments to regulate the electoral process. The Court turned back challenges to New York’s method for nominating judicial candidates, Washington’s modified blanket primary system, Indiana’s voter identification requirement, and Alabama’s use of gubernatorial appointment to fill county commission vacancies in Mobile County. Unlike other recent election decisions, these were not close cases. All nine Justices supported the New York holding, while supermajorities voted in favor of the result in the others. This consensus, moreover, emerged even as the Court voted to reverse unanimous decisions by …
Election Day Challenges To Polling Hours And The Judiciary's Cautious Response, Robert C. O'Brien, Amy Borlund, John Kay
Election Day Challenges To Polling Hours And The Judiciary's Cautious Response, Robert C. O'Brien, Amy Borlund, John Kay
Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Judicial Selection: It's More About The Choices Than Who Does The Choosing, Honorable Lavenski R. Smith
Judicial Selection: It's More About The Choices Than Who Does The Choosing, Honorable Lavenski R. Smith
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Post-Amendment 80 Judicial Politics In Arkansas: Have The Changes Undermined The Argument For Selection By Appointment?, Jay Barth
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Family Law & Civil Procedure - Daddy Dilemma: Should The Truth Matter? Martin V. Pierce, No. 06-950, 2007 Wl 1447911 (Ark. May 17, 2007), Katie S. Allen
Family Law & Civil Procedure - Daddy Dilemma: Should The Truth Matter? Martin V. Pierce, No. 06-950, 2007 Wl 1447911 (Ark. May 17, 2007), Katie S. Allen
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
[Tru/Fals]Isms: A Statistical Analysis Of Several Arkansas Judicial Election Bromides, Honorable Timothy Davis Fox
[Tru/Fals]Isms: A Statistical Analysis Of Several Arkansas Judicial Election Bromides, Honorable Timothy Davis Fox
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Justiciability Of Eligibility: May Courts Decide Who Can Be President?, Daniel P. Tokaji
The Justiciability Of Eligibility: May Courts Decide Who Can Be President?, Daniel P. Tokaji
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The 2008 election cycle has been a busy one for legal disputes over the qualifications of presidential candidates, with federal cases having been filed to challenge both major candidates’ eligibility under the “natural born Citizen” clause. These cases unquestionably present vital questions of constitutional law, touching on matters of self-evident national importance. It is doubtful, however, that they are justiciable in lower federal courts. Standing requirements and the political question doctrine make it unlikely that a federal court will reach the merits in cases of the type filed to date.
Magic Words And Millionaires: The Supreme Court's Assault On Campaign Funding, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2008), Michael J. Kasper
Magic Words And Millionaires: The Supreme Court's Assault On Campaign Funding, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2008), Michael J. Kasper
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why John Mccain Was A Citizen At Birth, Stephen E. Sachs
Why John Mccain Was A Citizen At Birth, Stephen E. Sachs
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Senator John McCain was born a citizen in 1936. Professor Gabriel J. Chin challenges this view in this Symposium, arguing that McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone (while his father was stationed there by the Navy) fell into a loophole in the governing statute. The best historical evidence, however, suggests that this loophole is an illusion and that McCain is a “natural born Citizen” eligible to be president.
Mccain’S Citizenship And Constitutional Method, Peter J. Spiro
Mccain’S Citizenship And Constitutional Method, Peter J. Spiro
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Many things may obstruct John McCain’s path to the White House, but his citizenship status is not among them. The question of his eligibility, given the circumstances of his birth, has already been resolved. That outcome has been produced by actors outside the courts. . . . If non-judicial actors—including Congress, editorialists, leading members of the bar, and the People themselves—manage to generate a constitutional consensus, there isn’t much that the courts can do about it. In cases such as this one, at least, that seems to be an acceptable method of constitutional determination.
Originalism And The Natural Born Citizen Clause, Lawrence B. Solum
Originalism And The Natural Born Citizen Clause, Lawrence B. Solum
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The enigmatic phrase “natural born citizen” poses a series of problems for contemporary originalism. New Originalists, like Justice Scalia, focus on the original public meaning of the constitutional text. The notion of a “natural born citizen” was likely a term of art derived from the idea of a “natural born subject” in English law—a category that most likely did not extend to persons, like Senator McCain, who were born outside sovereign territory. But the Constitution speaks of “citizens” and not “subjects,” introducing uncertainties and ambiguities that might (or might not) make McCain eligible for the presidency.
Why Senator John Mccain Cannot Be President: Eleven Months And A Hundred Yards Short Of Citizenship, Gabriel Chin
Why Senator John Mccain Cannot Be President: Eleven Months And A Hundred Yards Short Of Citizenship, Gabriel Chin
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Article II, section 1 of the Constitution provides that “No Person except a natural born Citizen . . . shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .” A person must be a citizen at birth to be a natural born citizen. Senator McCain was born in the Canal Zone in 1936. Although he is now a U.S. citizen, the law in effect in 1936 did not grant him citizenship at birth. Because he was not born a citizen, he is not eligible to the office of president.
Deliberative Dilemmas: A Critique Of Deliberation Day From The Perspective Of Election Law, Chad Flanders
Deliberative Dilemmas: A Critique Of Deliberation Day From The Perspective Of Election Law, Chad Flanders
All Faculty Scholarship
My paper deals with two subject areas - deliberative democracy theory and election law - that have had surprisingly little contact with another. My paper tries to remedy this lacuna by looking at how the two fields intersect and can contribute to the understanding of one another. In particular, I look in detail at a particularly prominent proposal by two political theorists, Bruce Ackerman and James Fishkin's Deliberation Day, and how the aims of that proposal might be frustrated by the present structure of American election law. I argue that because they fail to take into account certain structural features …
Reviving The Right To Vote, Ellen D. Katz
Reviving The Right To Vote, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Losers in partisan districting battles have long challenged the resulting districting plans under seemingly unrelated legal doctrines. They have filed lawsuits alleging malapportionment, racial gerrymandering, and racial vote dilution, and they periodically prevail. Many election law scholars worry about these lawsuits, claiming that they needlessly "racialize" fundamentally political disputes, distort important legal doctrines designed for other purposes, and provide an inadequate remedy for a fundamentally distinct electoral problem. I am not convinced. This Article argues that the application of distinct doctrines to invalidate or diminish what are indisputably partisan gerrymanders is not necessarily problematic, and that the practice may well …
Where Do We Draw The Line? Partisan Gerrymandering And The State Of Texas, Whitney M. Eaton
Where Do We Draw The Line? Partisan Gerrymandering And The State Of Texas, Whitney M. Eaton
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Legislative Findings Can Pad-Lock Redistricting Plans In Racial-Gerrymandering Cases, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1371 (2006), Frank Adams
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Judicial Nominations Wars, William P. Marshall
The Judicial Nominations Wars, William P. Marshall
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court And Voting Rights: A More Complete Exit Strategy, Grant M. Hayden
The Supreme Court And Voting Rights: A More Complete Exit Strategy, Grant M. Hayden
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
To the great relief of many observers, the Supreme Court has recently become more deferential to state legislatures with respect to their political redistricting plans. The only problem is that the Court appears to be in no mood to revisit some of the cases that got it entangled in the political thicket to begin with - the ones rigorously applying the one person, one vote standard. Indeed, it recently issued a summary affirmance of a lower court decision that tightened up its already exacting standards regarding population equality. As a result, the Court's partial retreat from politics is doing more …
Reinforcing Representation: Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Reinforcing Representation: Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Michigan Law Review
A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …
Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …
Redistricting In A Post-Shaw Era: A Small Treatise Accompanied By Districting Guidelines For Legislators, Litigants, And Courts, Katharine Inglis Butler
Redistricting In A Post-Shaw Era: A Small Treatise Accompanied By Districting Guidelines For Legislators, Litigants, And Courts, Katharine Inglis Butler
University of Richmond Law Review
Legislators in jurisdictions with even modest minority populations will find adopting a challenge-resistant redistricting plan to be more difficult than ever before. The problem is how much consideration to give to race. Too little consideration may produce a plan subject to challenge under the Voting Rights Act (the "Act"). Too much consideration may produce a plan subject to challenge on constitutional grounds.
"Be Careful What You Ask For": The 2000 Presidential Election, The U.S. Supreme Court, And The Law Of Criminal Procedure, Craig M. Bradley, Joseph L. Hoffmann
"Be Careful What You Ask For": The 2000 Presidential Election, The U.S. Supreme Court, And The Law Of Criminal Procedure, Craig M. Bradley, Joseph L. Hoffmann
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
The Politics Of Bush V. Gore, Evan Tsen Lee
The Politics Of Bush V. Gore, Evan Tsen Lee
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Critical Legal Studies ("the Crits") burst onto the law school scene in the mid-1970s. The Crits believe that "all law is politics." The Crits lost their momentum by the 1990s. The case Bush v. Gore has forced many to believe that all law is in fact politics.
A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Multiple-Choice Exam: Or, The Schoolroom Lessons From Bush V. Gore, Marcella David
A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Multiple-Choice Exam: Or, The Schoolroom Lessons From Bush V. Gore, Marcella David
Journal of Legal Education
No abstract provided.
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Lopez v. Monterey County is an odd decision. Justice O'Connor's majority opinion easily upholds the constitutionality of a broad construction of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in language reminiscent of the Warren Court. Acknowledging the "substantial 'federalism costs" resulting from the VRA's "federal intrusion into sensitive areas of state and local policymaking," Lopez recognizes that the Reconstruction Amendments "contemplate" this encroachment into realms "traditionally reserved to the States." Justice O'Connor affirms as constitutionally permissible the infringement that the section 5 preclearance process "by its nature" effects on state sovereignty, and applies section 5 broadly, holding the statute …
Trying To Make Peace With Bush V. Gore (Symposium: Bush V. Gore Issue 2001), Richard D. Friedman
Trying To Make Peace With Bush V. Gore (Symposium: Bush V. Gore Issue 2001), Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, shutting down the recounts of Florida's vote in the 2000 presidential election and effectively awarding the election to George W. Bush, has struck many observers, including myself, as outrageous.' Decisions of the Supreme Court should be more than mere reflections of ideological or partisan preference thinly camouflaged behind legalistic language. It would therefore be pleasant to be able to believe that they are more than that. Accordingly, Judge Richard Posner's analysis,2 in which he defends the result reached by the Court-though not the path by which it got there-is particularly welcome. Though …
The Unwelcome Judicial Obligation To Respect Politics In Racial Gerrymandering Remedies, Jeffrey L. Fisher
The Unwelcome Judicial Obligation To Respect Politics In Racial Gerrymandering Remedies, Jeffrey L. Fisher
Michigan Law Review
Like it or not, the attack on "bizarrely" shaped majority-minority electoral districts is now firmly underway. Nearly four years have passed since the Supreme Court first announced in Shaw v. Reno that a state's redistricting plan that is "so extremely irregular on its face that it rationally can be viewed only as an effort to segregate the races for purposes of voting" may violate the Equal Protection Clause. Such a district, the Court held, reinforces racial stereotypes, carries us further from the goal of a political system in which race no longer matters, and "threatens to undermine our system of …
The Three-Judge District Court In Voting Rights Litigation, Michael E. Solimine
The Three-Judge District Court In Voting Rights Litigation, Michael E. Solimine
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In recent Terms the Supreme Court has heard numerous appeals from the decisions of three-judge district courts in controversial Voting Rights Act cases as well as in challenges to congressional districts designed allegedly to facilitate the election of members of minority groups. Although the cases themselves have been followed closely, the institution of the three-judge district court itself has received relatively little attention, even though Congress passed legislation in 1976 that restricted the three-judge court's jurisdiction to reapportionment and certain Voting Rights Act cases. In this Article, Professor Solimine argues that numerous problems attend the formation and operation of such …