Election Law Commons^™

Freedom At The Polls: Guns, Speech, And The Right To Vote, Matthew B. Russett

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Note provides a brief overview of current firearm prohibitions at polling locations and examines the legislative justifications for these restrictions. Recently, an increasing number of states have enacted firearm prohibitions as a prophylactic measure against voter intimidation and disruption. Part II applies New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen’s history and tradition test to determine whether these prohibitions pass constitutional muster under the Second Amendment. Indeed, a critical examination of historical voting laws in America shows a compelling history of limiting firearms near polling locations. Part III examines similar themes in First Amendment …

Constitutional Structure And Election Law, Manoj Mate

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Since Bush v. Gore, scholarship on election law has centered on a theoretical debate between rights-based and structural theory approaches, and the appropriate role and scope of judicial intervention in election law cases. However, these debates have not fully assessed the degree to which the Court’s approach to constitutional structure has fundamentally reshaped election law. Over the past two decades, the Court has increasingly emphasized the importance of constitutional structure-based approaches in election law cases.

This Article analyzes these dynamics and advances a typology of constitutional structure-based approaches in election law. Drawing on scholarship on modalities of interpretation and …

Expanding The Foreign National Prohibition To Combat Russian Interference In U.S. Elections, Hailey Arnett

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In 2016, the Russian government purchased political advertisements from U.S. social media companies like Facebook to sway the U.S. presidential election. These purchases violated the foreign national prohibition (“the Prohibition”), which Congress codified as part of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 (FECA). This Note explains why Congress should expand the Prohibition to capture the recipients of independent expenditures that violate the Prohibition and fine people who run online platforms that receive independent expenditures or contributions made by foreign nationals in violation of the Prohibition.

Part I describes current U.S. case law on domestic and foreign campaign finance …

Voter F̶R̶A̶U̶D̶ Mistake, Benjamin Plener Cover

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

False narratives challenging electoral integrity often cite ineligible voting as a prime example of so-called widespread voter fraud. This Article demonstrates that ineligible voting often consists of mistakes that are problematically treated like fraud. Some jurisdictions criminalize ineligible voting on a strict liability basis, imposing punishment even when the ineligible voter is unaware of her ineligibility. When jurisdictions impose this strict criminal liability, mistakes are often misunderstood or misrepresented as fraud. This harsh and confused treatment of voter mistake undermines the criminal justice system by severing criminality from culpability, punishing good faith democratic participation, targeting marginalized populations, and amplifying systemic …

Maybe We Don't Need To Find Waldo After All: Why Preventing Voter Fraud Is Not A Compelling Interest, Brandon T. Goldstein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note takes the position, counter to established jurisprudence, that the prevention of voter fraud is not a compelling state interest that can independently justify restrictions on the right to vote. It will seek to do so through two mechanisms. First, it will argue that the right to vote is unjustifiably treated differently than other rights by courts, using a comparison to the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Second, it will argue that current jurisprudence holding the prevention of voter fraud to be a compelling interest misunderstands the inherent means-ends distinction in voting rights standards. The prevention of voter …

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 …

Unequal Protection: Rethinking The Standards And Safeguards For Absentee Ballot Schemes, Kira M. Simon

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Death Of Non-Resident Contribution Limit Bans And The Birth Of The New Small, Swing State, George J. Somi

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District race in 2018 featured an eye-popping number: 96.7. That figure represents the percentage of candidate Maura Sullivan’s individual contributions derived from out-of-state, non–New Hampshire donors. In August 2018, of the $1.37 million USD of individual contributions that Sullivan had raised, only 3.3%—$46,648 USD—originated from in-state contributors. Sullivan had received individual donations amounting to $497,405 USD from Boston, $216,359 USD from New York City, $101,562 USD from the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and $92,371 USD from San Francisco.

In nearby Maine, campaign finance reports filed on October 15, 2019, with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) indicate …

Not Gill-Ty: Challenging And Providing A Workable Alternative To The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Standing Analysis In Gill V. Whitford, Colin Neal

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Protecting The States From Electoral Invasions, Drew Marvel

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the threat of foreign interference in U.S. elections has loomed large in the minds of the American public. During the 2016 campaign season, Russian government-backed hackers infiltrated the networks and computers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and various campaign officials, harvesting private information and installing spyware and malware for ongoing intelligence purposes. U.S. intelligence officials have indicated that, using similar tactics, the Russian hackers also targeted election systems and officials in all fifty states, successfully breaching at least two of those states’ election systems, Illinois and Florida. …

Puerto Rico, Inc.: Implicit Incorporation And Puerto Rico’S Right To Vote For Presidential Electors, Aaron Barden

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The 2016 Voting Wars: From Bad To Worse, Richard L. Hasen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Incarcerated And Unrepresented: Prison-Based Gerrymandering And Why Evenwel’S Approval Of “Total Population” As A Population Base Shouldn’T Include Incarcerated Populations, Emily J. Heltzel

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

But First, (Don’T) Let Me Take A Selfie: New Hampshire’S Ban On Ballot Selfies And First Amendment Scrutiny, Emily Wagman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Clearing The Political Thicket: Why Political Gerrymandering For Partisan Advantage Is Unconstitutional, Michael Parsons

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Unstable Footing: Shelby County’S Misapplication Of The Equal Footing Doctrine, Austin Graham

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Election Evidence: The Promises And Realities Of California's Citizen Commission, Brett Piersma

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Online Behavioral Advertising And Deceptive Campaign Tactics: Policy Issues, Nichole Rustin-Paschal

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Internet Voting, Security, And Privacy, Jeremy Epstein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Campaign Disclosure, Privacy And Transparency, Deborah G. Johnson, Priscilla M. Regan, Kent Wayland

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Mrs. Mcintyre's Persona: Brining Privacy Theory To Election Law, William Mcgeveran

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Anonymity And Democratic Citizenship, James A. Gardner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Two Challenges For Campaign Finance Disclosure After Citizens United And Doe V. Reed, Richard Briffault

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Election Period And Regulation Of The Democratic Process, Saul Zipkin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Voting System Risk Assessment Via Computational Complexity Analysis, Dan S. Wallach

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Any voting system must be designed to resist a variety of failures, ranging from inadvertent misconfiguration to intentional tampering. The problem with conducting analyses of these issues, particularly across widely divergent technologies, is that it is very difficult to make apples-to-apples comparisons. This paper considers the use of a standard technique used in the analysis of algorithms, namely complexity analysis with its "big-O" notation, which can provide a high-level abstraction that allows for direct comparisons across voting systems. We avoid the need for making unreliable estimates of the probability a system might be hacked or of the cost of bribing …

Voting Technology And The 2008 New Hampshire Primary, Michael C. Herron, Walter R. Mebane, Jonathan N. Wand

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Machine Errors And Undervotes In Florida 2006 Revisited, Walter R. Mebane

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The 2006 election for U.S. House of Representatives District 13 in Sarasota County, Florida, attracted extensive controversy because an unusually high proportion of the ballots cast lacked a vote for that office, and the unusual number of undervotes probably changed the election outcome. Intensive technical studies based on examining software and hardware from the iVotronic touchscreen voting machines used to conduct the election failed to find mechanical flaws sufficient to explain the undervotes. Studies that examined the ballots used in Sarasota and in some other counties concluded the high undervote rate was caused by peculiar features of the ballot's format …

The Case Of The Disappearing Votes: Lessons From The Jennings V. Buchanan Congressional Election Contest, Jessica Ring Amunson, Sam Hirsch

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Early Voting Reforms And American Elections, Paul Gronke

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Voter Registration And Election Reform, Daniel P. Tokaji

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.