Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law and Politics (26)
- Constitutional Law (17)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (15)
- Legislation (14)
- First Amendment (9)
-
- Law and Race (8)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (7)
- Courts (6)
- State and Local Government Law (6)
- American Politics (5)
- Political Science (5)
- Supreme Court of the United States (5)
- Fourteenth Amendment (4)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- Judges (2)
- Labor and Employment Law (2)
- Legal History (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Other Law (2)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (2)
- Agency (1)
- Asian Studies (1)
- Civic and Community Engagement (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Communication (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Institution
-
- University of Montana (12)
- Pepperdine University (10)
- William & Mary Law School (9)
- University of Richmond (7)
- University of Kentucky (6)
-
- University of Michigan Law School (6)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (5)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- University of the Pacific (3)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Singapore Management University (2)
- St. John's University School of Law (2)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Colorado Law School (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Western New England University (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Bemidji State University (1)
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University (1)
- Mississippi Christian University School of Law (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Elections (16)
- Voting (14)
- Voting Rights Act (13)
- Election law (10)
- Election (9)
-
- Discrimination (8)
- Election Law (7)
- Shelby County v. Holder (7)
- Campaign finance (6)
- Civil Rights (6)
- Congress (6)
- Democracy (6)
- Racial discrimination (6)
- Voting rights (6)
- Politics (5)
- United States Supreme Court (5)
- African Americans (4)
- Constitutional violations (4)
- Department of Justice (4)
- Preclearance (4)
- Race and law (4)
- Remedial regimes (4)
- Voting practices (4)
- Ballot (3)
- Campaign Finance (3)
- Candidate (3)
- Civil rights (3)
- Deterrence (3)
- Equality (3)
- Law (3)
- Publication
-
- Montana Law Review (8)
- University of Richmond Law Review (7)
- Articles (6)
- Pepperdine Law Review (6)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (5)
-
- Popular Media (5)
- All Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (4)
- Oklahoma Law Review (4)
- Faculty Law Review Articles (3)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- McGeorge Law Review (3)
- Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Media Presence (2)
- Publications (2)
- Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Appellate Briefs (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Faculty Articles and Papers (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings (1)
- Graduate Theses and Dissertations (1)
- Hofstra Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 99 of 99
Full-Text Articles in Election Law
Redistricting Litigation And The Delegation Of Democratic Design, Lisa Marshall Manheim
Redistricting Litigation And The Delegation Of Democratic Design, Lisa Marshall Manheim
Articles
This Article seeks to reveal how the practice of litigating as redistricting, which has evolved into a form of litigation highly susceptible to procedural manipulation, has created a type of redistricting that grants profound power to those who choose to litigate. In so doing, this Article rejects any understanding of the redistricting process that understands the influence of litigants to be somehow negated or neutralized by the involvement of courts. It recognizes, moreover, that many of the defining features of redistricting litigation–which are, in certain respects, analogous to those characterizing other problematic forms of litigation–nevertheless reflect some of the most …
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
The pending challenge to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act insists the statute is no longer necessary. Should the Supreme Court agree, its ruling is likely to reflect the belief that section 5 is not only obsolete but that its requirements do more harm today than the condition it was crafted to address. In this Essay, Professor Ellen D. Katz examines why the Court might liken section 5 to a destructive treatment and why reliance on that analogy in the pending case threatens to leave the underlying condition unaddressed and Congress without the power to address it.
The Future Of Public Funding, Richard Briffault
The Future Of Public Funding, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
The title of my talk today is the “the future of public funding,” and I am tempted to say “there’s not much future” for public funding. The 2012 presidential election marked the first time since the presidential public funding law was enacted in 1974 that neither major party presidential candidate accepted public funding in the general election and the first time that no significant contender for a major party nomination accepted public funding in the primary phase. Congressional public funding appears dead in the water. In the last Congress, public funding proposals were referred to House and Senate committees, where …
Coordination Reconsidered, Richard Briffault
Coordination Reconsidered, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
At the heart of American campaign finance law is the distinction drawn by the Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo between contributions and expenditures. According to the Court, contributions may be limited because they pose the dangers of corruption and the appearance of corruption, but expenditures pose no such dangers and therefore may not be limited. The distinction between the two types of campaign spending turns not on the form – the fact that contributions proceed from a donor to a candidate, while expenditures involve direct efforts to influence the voters – but on whether the campaign practice implicates the …
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Shelby County v. Holder offers three reasons for why the record Congress amassed to support the 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was legally insufficient to justify the statute's continued regional application: (1) the problems Congress documented in 2006 were not as severe as those that prompted it to craft the regime in 1965; (2) these problems did not lead Congress to alter the statute's pre-existing coverage formula; and (3) these problems did not exclusively involve voter registration and the casting of ballots.
South Carolina's 'Evolutionary Process', Ellen D. Katz
South Carolina's 'Evolutionary Process', Ellen D. Katz
Articles
When Congress first enacted the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in 1965, public officials in South Carolina led the charge to scrap the new statute. Their brief to the Supreme Court of the United States described the VRA as an “unjustified” and “arbitrary” affront to the “Equality of Statehood” principle, and a “usurp[ation]” of the State’s legislative and executive functions. Not surprisingly, the Warren Court was unpersuaded and opted instead to endorse broad congressional power to craft “inventive” remedies to address systematic racial discrimination and to “shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of evil to its victims.” …
Shelby County V. Holder: Why Section 2 Matters, Ellen D. Katz
Shelby County V. Holder: Why Section 2 Matters, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Editor’s Note: Professor Ellen D. Katz writes and teaches about election law, civil rights and remedies, and equal protection. She and the Voting Rights Initiative at Michigan Law filed a brief as amicus curiae in Shelby County v. Holder, on which the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments February 27. Here, she examines why Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bears consideration in the case, which involves a challenge to Section 5 of the act.
Living With Voters’ Existential Angst, Tan K. B. Eugene
Living With Voters’ Existential Angst, Tan K. B. Eugene
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
SMU Assistant Professor of Law and NMP Eugene Tan analysed the results of the Punggol East by-election and discussed what it signals next for the People’s Action Party (PAP), the Workers’ Party, the opposition in general and Singaporeans. He said that while we should be careful not to extrapolate the results of the Punggol East by-election as being a barometer of national sentiment, the results are nonetheless a useful snapshot of the dynamic political situation. He added that PAP urgently needs to connect more with this existential angst, anxiety and aspirations of voters who feel a growing sense of alienation. …
Mapping A Post-Shelby County Contingency Strategy, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Mapping A Post-Shelby County Contingency Strategy, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Faculty Scholarship
This Essay was written for the Yale Law Journal Online Symposium on the future of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act after Shelby County v. Holder. Professors Guy-Uriel E. Charles and Luis Fuentes-Rohwer argue that voting rights activists ought to be prepared for a future in which section 5 is not part of the landscape. If the Court strikes down section 5, an emerging ecosystem of private entities and organized interest groups of various stripes—what they call institutional intermediaries—may be willing and able to mimic the elements that made section 5 an effective regulatory device. As voting rights …