Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- First Amendment (10)
- Law and Politics (8)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (7)
- State and Local Government Law (7)
- Constitutional Law (5)
-
- Courts (4)
- Judges (4)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Internet Law (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (2)
- American Politics (1)
- Asian Studies (1)
- Communications Law (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Elder Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- International Law (1)
- International and Area Studies (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Law and Psychology (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Nonprofit Organizations Law (1)
- Political Science (1)
- Institution
-
- University of Richmond (7)
- University of Michigan Law School (6)
- Cleveland State University (4)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (4)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (3)
-
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Notre Dame Law School (2)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (2)
- Brigham Young University Law School (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Singapore Management University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- University of the Pacific (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Elections (7)
- Voting (5)
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Election law (3)
- Voting Rights Act (3)
-
- Campaign finance (2)
- Election (2)
- Freedom of speech (2)
- Internet (2)
- Judicial review (2)
- Law (2)
- New York (2)
- New York State Board of Elections v. Lopez Torres (2)
- Nominations (2)
- Political parties (2)
- Political speech (2)
- Roberts Court (2)
- Voting rights (2)
- 501(c)(3) (1)
- Absentee (1)
- Alabama (1)
- American Politics (1)
- Apportionment (Election law) (1)
- Assistance (1)
- Assurance (1)
- BCRA (1)
- Ballot (1)
- Ballot initiatives (1)
- Ballots (1)
- Bias (1)
- Publication
-
- North Carolina Central Law Review (4)
- Articles (3)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (3)
- Richmond Public Interest Law Review (3)
-
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (2)
- BYU Law Review (1)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Law Faculty Contributions to Books (1)
- Law Faculty Presentations and Testimony (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Maryland Law Review (1)
- Maryland Law Review Online (1)
- McGeorge Law Review (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law (1)
- University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class (1)
- University of Richmond Law Review (1)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 41 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Election Law
Davis V. Fec: The Roberts Court's Continuing Attack On Campaign Finance Reform, Richard Briffault
Davis V. Fec: The Roberts Court's Continuing Attack On Campaign Finance Reform, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
In Davis v. FEC, decided on the last day of the October 2007 Term, a closely divided Supreme Court invalidated the so-called Millionaires' Amendment, which was a provision added to the Federal Election Campaign Act ("FECA") as part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act ("BCRA") of 2002 to make it easier for Senate and House candidates to raise private contributions when they run against an opponent who uses a substantial amount of personal wealth to pay for his or her campaign. From the reform perspective, the loss of the Millionaires' Amendment was not of great moment. The Amendment was …
Defining Race: The Obama Phenomenon And The Voting Rights Act, Janai S. Nelson
Defining Race: The Obama Phenomenon And The Voting Rights Act, Janai S. Nelson
Faculty Publications
This piece publishes remarks delivered at a symposium organized by the Albany Law Review and the Albany Journal of Science and Technology exploring the definition of race. The topic, “Defining Race,” is related to the recent presidential election and, in particular, to Barack Obama's successful candidacy to become the first black President of the United States. Rather than deconstruct, redefine, or explore the definition of race, these remarks explore briefly whether race relations in the electoral arena have changed to such a degree that race and race-based remedies are no longer needed, and what evidence from this presidential election would …
Politics At The Pulpit: Tax Benefits, Substantial Burdens, And Institutional Free Exercise, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Politics At The Pulpit: Tax Benefits, Substantial Burdens, And Institutional Free Exercise, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Journal Articles
More than fifty years ago, Congress enacted a prohibition against political campaign intervention for all charities, including churches and other houses of worship, as a condition for receiving tax deductible contributions. Yet the IRS has never taken a house of worship to court for alleged violation of the prohibition through political comments from the pulpit, presumably at least in part because of concerns about the constitutionality of doing so. This decision is surprising, because a careful review of Free Exercise Clause case law - both before and after the landmark Employment Division v. Smith decision - reveals that the prohibition …
Sit Down And Count The Cost: A Framework For Constitutionally Enforcing The 501(C)(3) Campaign Intervention Ban, Benjamin Leff
Sit Down And Count The Cost: A Framework For Constitutionally Enforcing The 501(C)(3) Campaign Intervention Ban, Benjamin Leff
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code prohibits charities from intervening in a political campaign for or against a candidate for public office. The IRS currently interprets the campaign-intervention ban to absolutely prevent charities from communicating their views on candidates, even if such communications are completely financed by non-501(c)(3) affiliates.
This article argues that the current IRS enforcement paradigm is unconstitutional because it exceeds the government interest in preventing tax-deductible donations to be used for campaign-intervention. A constitutional interpretation exists under the current statutory framework, but it would require the IRS to shift its focus exclusively to campaign-intervention-related expenditures. The …
One Person, One Vote, One Application: District Court Decision In Ray V. Texas Upholds Texas Absentee Voting Law That Disenfranchises Elderly And Disabled Voters, Sean Flynn
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
No abstract provided.
The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same, Neal Devins
The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Does The Introduction Of Independent Redistricting Reduce Congressional Partisanship, David G. Oedel, Allen K. Lynch, Sean E. Mulholland, Neil T. Edwards
Does The Introduction Of Independent Redistricting Reduce Congressional Partisanship, David G. Oedel, Allen K. Lynch, Sean E. Mulholland, Neil T. Edwards
Villanova Law Review (1956 - )
No abstract provided.
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 …
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Operating within these regimes, Obama was able to mount a credible--and ultimately successful--challenge to the leadership's choice for the nomination while Lopez Torres could not. This article offers an explanation why. It argues that Obama succeeded where Lopez Torres failed because the nomination process Obama traversed was more penetrable and more contestable than the one Lopez Torres faced.
Breaching A Leaking Dam?: Corporate Money And Elections, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Breaching A Leaking Dam?: Corporate Money And Elections, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Journal Articles
With a brief order issued at the end of its last term, the Supreme Court dramatically raised the stakes in Citizens United v. FEC. What many had predicted would be a case decided on narrow, technical grounds has now become a possible vehicle for overturning two key campaign finance precedents. By ordering re-argument and supplemental briefing on the issue of whether it should overrule either or both Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the part of McConnell v. FEC which addresses the facial validity of Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, the Court signaled that …
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 …