Election Law Commons^™

Why Top-Two Primaries Can't Be Fixed, Quinn Yeargain

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Residency Requirements In Initiative Ballot Access: The Limits Of First Amendment Rights And The Fight Against Atlanta's 'Cop City', Ross Levin

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

When election procedure is challenged, courts must balance First Amendment rights against states’ prerogative to regulate elections. Residency requirements are an election procedure that require petition circulators be a resident of the jurisdiction. Residency restrictions on petition circulators—who collect signatures to achieve ballot access—weigh too heavily against First Amendment rights. In jurisdictions where residency requirements remain in place for initiative ballot access, voters are unconstitutionally shut out of the political process.

In this Article, I examine two cases in which the Supreme Court extended its First Amendment ballot access jurisprudence to ballot initiatives, Meyer v. Grant and Buckley v. American …

Voter Confidence And The World Of Appearances: Where Campaign-Finance And Election-Administration Law Collide, Kishore S. Chundi

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Scholarship on election-administration measures (like voter ID laws) and campaign-finance laws has been siloed. American political affiliations, in their current form, dictate that liberals support campaign-finance restrictions and oppose voter ID laws, and vice versa for conservatives. But the Court has analyzed both measures using the similarly odd lens of appearances—the perception of electoral integrity in voter ID cases and the perception of corruption in campaign-finance cases. Yet despite the nearly identical justifications for campaign-finance and election-administration measures, the Court has treated these claims quite differently. Election-administration laws receive nearly automatic deference, whereas campaign-finance laws are routinely overturned. This Article …

Preparing For Election Disruptions In 2024, Norman J. Ornstein

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The U.S. Electoral System And Foreign Interference, Jeremi Suri

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The Electoral Count Reform Act In 2024, Adav Noti

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The County Certification Problem, Jenny Gimian

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Litigating The 2024 Election, Richard Pildes

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Impending Peril: Rethinking The Future Of Democracy, Karen J. Greenberg

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In their new books, Anne Applebaum and Timothy Snyder explore the vulnerabilities that plague democracies globally and in the United States. Documenting the elements that threaten democracy, they share a vision of the future that demands a deepened understanding of the forces that oppose democracy—among them, corruption, disinformation and isolation. Offering visions of a more enlightened public space, and a heightened sense of empathy, they each attempt to provide a roadmap to a more equitable, just, and life-affirming future.

The Burden To Reach The Ballots: Tackling Eleventh Circuit Line-Warming Bans And Their Intersectional Harm Under An Ada Framework, Alyssa Clune

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Line-warming bans present an additional hurdle for voters across America, especially in an era of historically few polling locations and historically long lines to reach the ballot. Particularly in Eleventh Circuit states like Georgia and Florida, line-warming bans, in conjunction with long wait times, have had a disparate impact on Black communities and their ability to cast ballots in key swing districts. Nevertheless, attempts to bring racial discrimination claims against these bans have not been successful in the Eleventh Circuit. This Essay proposes a new strategy to tackle line-warming bans under an ADA framework. It analyzes the harm that these …

Reforms For Filling Vacancies In The U.S. Senate And House Of Representatives, Nora Donnelly, Alexa Green, Lea Vallone

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Many states’ laws for filling vacancies in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives weaken democratic legitimacy. Vacancies in the House are increasingly prolonged, leaving constituents without representation for extended periods. Senate vacancies are filled more quickly, but gubernatorial appointees often gain a significant incumbency advantage when they later seek election. In this report, the Fordham Law School Rule of Law Clinic recommends holding open, nonpartisan elections, without primaries or runoffs, within three months of most Senate and House vacancies, with earlier initiation when vacancies are anticipated. The report further proposes limiting interim Senate appointments to “caretakers” who serve only …

The California Supreme Court Replaces Gingles Prong One, Bruce A. Wessel, Jason D. D'Andrea

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Spies, Trolls, And Bots: Combating Foreign Election Interference In The Marketplace Of Ideas, Nahal Kazemi

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Foreign disinformation operations on social media pose a significant and rapidly evolving risk, particularly when aimed at American elections. We must urgently and effectively address this form of election interference. This Article examines potential responses to those risks, through a review of the unique characteristics, both practical and legal, of political advertising on social media platforms. This Article analyzes proposed legislative responses to foreign disinformation, noting that no single proposed law to date adequately addresses the threats and challenges posed by foreign disinformation. This Article considers the election law landscape in which the proposed laws would operate. It evaluates the …

Fraudulent Vote Dilution, Jason Marisam

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In recent years, the Republican Party and conservative groups have brought lawsuits that advance a novel type of voting claim, which this Article calls fraudulent vote dilution. This claim asserts that an election rule is unconstitutional because it makes it too easy to cast fraudulent ballots that, when tabulated, will dilute the strength of valid and honest ballots. With the 2024 election nearing, the Republican Party may again test fraudulent vote dilution claims in court, as it seeks injunctions to make liberal election rules stricter in ways that make it harder for Democratic voters to cast ballots. This Article advances …

Americans For Prosperity Foundation V. Bonta: Protecting Free Speech And Its Implications For Campaign Finance Disclosures, Sara Lindsay Neier

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In 2021, the United States Supreme Court in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta considered the anonymous speech rights of charitable donors against the California Attorney General’s interest in preventing wrongdoing by charitable organizations. The Court applied exacting scrutiny, a standard traditionally applied to campaign finance disclosure laws, determining that California’s requirement was facially invalid as a violation of associational rights. Bonta did not concern campaign finance, making this application of exacting scrutiny novel. This Article considers the open questions raised by Bonta regarding how exacting scrutiny should be applied and what it means for the future of campaign finance …

The Case For Federal Deference To State Court Redistricting Rulings: Lessons From Ohio’S Districting Disaster, John Sullivan Baker

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In a watershed 2015 referendum, Ohioans decisively approved a state constitutional amendment that prohibited partisan gerrymandering of General Assembly districts and created the Ohio Redistricting Commission. Though the amendment mandated that the Commission draw proportional maps not primarily designed to favor or disfavor a political party, the Commission—composed of partisan elected officials—repeatedly enacted unconstitutional, heavily gerrymandered districting plans in blatant defiance of the Ohio Supreme Court.

After the Ohio Supreme Court struck down four of the Commission’s plans, leaving Ohio without state House and Senate maps just months before the 2022 general election, a group of voters sued in the …

Why We Can’T Have Nice Things: Equality, Proportionality, And Our Abridged Voting Rights Regime, Michael Latner

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

What constraints should the protection of political equality place on the design of electoral systems? With the exception of requiring approximate population equality across a jurisdiction’s districts, the U.S. voting rights regime accepts substantial disproportionality in voting strength. This Article addresses the current Supreme Court’s abandonment of the Second Reconstruction’s “one person, one vote” standard with regard to both racial and partisan gerrymandering, and assesses the role that Congress and political science have played in this transition. This Article argues that an unabridged voting rights regime must recognize a standard of proportional representation derived from the protection of individual political …

Discriminatory Intent Claims Under Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, Amandeep S. Grewal

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

This Article addresses a new controversy over whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits laws that exhibit “only” discriminatory intent, in the absence of discriminatory results. Lower courts have long embraced an intent approach for Section 2. And the Department of Justice has rested its entire ongoing case against Georgia’s controversial voting bill on an intent approach.

However, this Article shows that the Supreme Court’s decision in Brnovich v. DNC effectively rejects the intent approach to Section 2. In April 2023, the Eleventh Circuit reversed its prior cases and now rejects an intent theory. This puts in peril …

Voting Rights And The Electoral Process: Resolving Representation Issues Due To Felony Disenfranchisement And Prison Gerrymandering, Andrew Calabrese, Tim Gordon, Tianyi Lu

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Felony disenfranchisement and prison gerrymandering distort democratic representation by excluding incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals from political participation while artificially inflating representation in prison-hosting districts. In this report, the Fordham Law School Rule of Law Clinic recommends restoring voting rights to individuals with felony convictions once they are released from prison and ending prison-based gerrymandering by counting incarcerated persons with a certain number of years left in their sentences as residents of the districts where they intend to reside after their release, in addition to other reforms to effectively carry out these policies.

Third Parties And The Electoral College: How Ranked Choice Voting Can Stop The Third-Party Disruptor Effect, Hillary Bendert, Jacqueline Hayes, Kevin Ruane

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Third-party candidates have at times altered the outcomes of presidential elections by drawing votes away from major-party candidates. This “disruptor” effect is largely a product of states’ winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes, which awards all of a state’s electors to the plurality winner. The system discourages support for third-party candidates and can produce results that fail to reflect majority preferences. This report by the Fordham Law School Rule of Law Clinic recommends that states adopt ranked-choice voting for presidential elections to ensure that winners command majority support. It also outlines complementary reforms, including best practices for implementing ranked-choice voting and …

Presidential Election Disruptions: Balancing The Rule Of Law And Emergency Response, Jason D'Andrea, Sonia Montejano, Matthew Vaughan

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Unexpected disruptions, such as natural disasters and terrorist attacks, could interfere with presidential elections. In this report, the Fordham Law School Rule of Law Clinic advances recommendations for how states should implement the federal law that allows them to extend the time for voting in response to catastrophic events. States should authorize local and state-level officials to trigger extensions, while providing for expedited judicial review of those decisions, whether to grant or deny additional voting time. By dispersing decision-making authority and ensuring prompt judicial oversight, these reforms aim to protect voters’ ability to cast ballots and to guard against the …

Candidates Of Their Choice? Paradoxical Impact Of The Voting Rights Act In Virginia, Mark E. Rush

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Title I Of The Civil Rights Act In Contemporary Voting Rights Litigation, Helen L. Brewer

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The New Laboratories Of Democracy, Gerald S. Dickinson

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Epic Fail: Harkenrider V. Hochul And New York's 2022 Misadventure In "Independent" Redistricting, Richard Briffault

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

De-Class-Ifying Microtargeted Political Advertising, Jacob Kovacs-Goodman

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In contemporary American politics, Big Tech companies provide sophisticated advertising interfaces that enable anyone to target specific voters by demographic. These companies defend their tools as “neutral” to evade culpability for discriminatory ads. Yet, such microtargeted advertising presents a significant threat to democracy. This Article advances a possible two-pronged solution to bar online platforms from targeting political ads based on a user’s protected class. First, this Article promotes a largely unexplored tactic: extending Title II of the Civil Rights Act into the digital space so that behavior that would be impermissibly discriminatory offline is not permitted online. Second, this Article …

A Government Of Laws And Not Of Men: Why Justice Brandeis Was Right To Assume Congress Can Restrain The President's Removal Power, Danielle Rosenblum

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Since the Founding, the extent of the president’s power to remove executive officials from office remains unsettled. While the Appointments Clause in Article II, Section 2 empowers Congress to participate in the hiring of executive officials, the United States Constitution’s text is silent on whether Congress can limit the president’s ability to fire such employees. The debate on the proper scope of the president’s removal power is significant because it serves as a proxy for a larger constitutional question: whether constraints on presidential power advance or sit in tension with democracy. This Article argues that Justice Brandeis was right to …

A Modern-Day 3/5 Compromise: The Case For Finding Prison Gerrymandering Unconstitutional Under The Thirteenth Amendment, Shana Iden

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Vestiges of slavery and systemic disenfranchisement of people of color persist in the United States. One of these remnants is the practice of prison gerrymandering, which occurs when government officials count incarcerated individuals as part of the population of the prison’s location rather than the individual’s home district. This Article argues that prison gerrymandering functions as a badge of slavery that should be prohibited under the Thirteenth Amendment.

First, this Article provides background on prison gerrymandering and charts its impact through history, particularly on Black communities. Moreover, this Article analyzes how litigation under the Fourteenth Amendment has not yielded meaningful …

A Constitutional Right To Early Voting, David Schultz

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Voting is a cost-benefit decision. Individuals are more likely to vote if the benefits of doing so outweigh the disadvantages. With early voting laws eased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2020 election demonstrated that turnout increases when elected officials reduce voting costs. Despite all the benefits of early voting, there is no constitutional right, and it remains a privilege that state legislatures can revoke at will.

Since the 2020 election, state legislatures have proposed—and enacted—hundreds of bills to change voting rules. But with the intense partisan disagreement over voting, coupled with political polarization reaching an apex, these acts restricting …

The Looming Threat Of The Independent State Legislature Theory And The Erosion Of The Voting Rights Act: It Is Time To Enshrine The Right To Vote, Javon Davis

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Over the last decade, the emergence of an imperial United States Supreme Court—currently armed with the largest conservative majority since the 1930s—has radically reshaped federal voting rights protections. During the litigation surrounding the 2020 election, however, an obscure threat reemerged. The fringe independent state legislature (“ISL”) theory is a potentially revolutionary constitutional theory that could lead to widespread voter disenfranchisement. Proponents of the theory, including Supreme Court Justices, posit, in part, that the United States Constitution vests state legislatures with plenary power to construct rules for federal elections—unbound by state constitutions and free from state judicial review.

Once a refuge …