Election Law Commons^™

The Question For Another Day: Hooker V. Illinois State Board Of Elections And Its Effect On The Vitality Of Citizen Ballot Initiatives And Redistricting Reform In Illinois, Thomas Q. Ford

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Like most states, Illinois is no stranger to political gerrymandering. Since 2010, redistricting reformers have made repeated efforts to change the way Illinois's political maps are drawn, essentially by minimizing or eliminating the role lawmakers play in the process. Polls show the vast majority of Illinoisans support such a change. Reformers have chosen Illinois's citizen ballot initiative as their vehicle to amend the redistricting process, but every proposed initiative has been struck down in court before reaching voters. Most recently, the Illinois Supreme Court rejected a proposed initiative in Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections. This Note argues …

Keynote Address: Judging The Political And Political Judging: Justice Scalia As Case Study, Richard L. Hasen

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This is a revised version of a Keynote Address delivered at “The Supreme Court and American Politics,” a symposium held October 17, 2017 at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. In this Address, Professor Hasen considers through the lens of Justice Scalia’s opinions the role that views of the political process play, at least rhetorically, in how Supreme Court Justices decide cases. It focuses on Justice Scalia’s contradictory views on self-dealing and incumbency protection across a range of cases, comparing campaign finance on the one hand to partisan gerrymandering, voter identification laws, political patronage, and ballot access rules on the other. …

Prophylactic Redistricting? Congress's Section 5 Power And The New Equal Protection Right To Vote, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Did The African-American Electorate Unintentionally Help Elect Donald Trump President?, C. Daniel Chill

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race And Representation Revisited: The New Racial Gerrymandering Cases And Section 2 Of The Vra, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article explores the Supreme Court's new racial gerrymandering cases and argue that those cases are on a collision course with Section 2 of the VRA. We revisit the Shaw line of cases and explain that the Shaw cases were more sympathetic to the representational rights of voters of color than are the new racial gerrymandering cases. This is primarily because the Shaw cases made room within the doctrine for the state to pursue descriptive representation for voters of color. We argue that new racial gerrymandering cases are inimical to descriptive representation. To the extent that voting rights scholars and …

The History Of Redistricting In Georgia, Charles S. Bullock Iii

Georgia Law Review

In his memoirs, Chief Justice Earl Warren singled out
the redistrictingcases as the most significant decisions of
his tenure on the Court., A review of the changes
redistricting introduced in Georgia supports Warren's
assessment. Not only have the obligations to equalize
populations across districts and to do so in a racially fair
manner transformed the makeup of the state's collegial
bodies, Georgia has provided the setting for multiple cases
that have defined the requirements to be met when
designing districts.
Other than the very first adjustments that occurred in
the 1960s, changes in Georgia plans had to secure
approval from …

Gerrymandering And The Constitutional Norm Against Government Partisanship, Michael S. Kang

Michigan Law Review

This Article challenges the basic premise in the law of gerrymandering that partisanship is a constitutional government purpose at all. The central problem, Justice Scalia once explained in Vieth v. Jubilerer, is that partisan gerrymandering becomes unconstitutional only when it “has gone too far,” giving rise to the intractable inquiry into “how much is too much.” But the premise that partisanship is an ordinary and lawful purpose, articulated confidently as settled law and widely understood as such, is largely wrong as constitutional doctrine. The Article surveys constitutional law to demonstrate the vitality of an important, if implicit norm against …

Redistricting Reform In Wisconsin To Curtail Gerrymandering: The Wisconsin Impartial Citizens Redistricting Commission, Joseph W. Bukowski

Marquette Law Review

After an extremely partisan gerrymander in 2011, Wisconsin needs redistricting reform in order to eliminate partisan politics from the process. Now more than ever, momentum for change has reached its peak: the Wisconsin legislative maps as drawn in 2011 were ruled unconstitutional in Whitford v. Gill; the Supreme Court has recently ruled in favor of states implementing independent redistricting commissions; and nearly half of the states in the United States are beginning to use independent commissions for redistricting. This Comment proposes a unique approach for Wisconsin to adopt in order to curtail gerrymandering: the Wisconsin Impartial Citizens Redistricting Commission (WICRC). …

The Current State Of Election Law In The United States, Mark Rush

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Political Gerrymandering: Was Elbridge Gerry Right, C. Daniel Chill

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Quick And Dirty: The New Misreading Of The Voting Rights Act, Justin Levitt

Florida State University Law Review

The role of race in the apportionment of political power is one of the thorniest problems at the heart of American democracy, and reappears with dogged consistency on the docket of the Supreme Court. Most recently, the Court resolved a case from Alabama involving the Voting Rights Act and the appropriate use of race in redistricting. But though the Court correctly decided the narrow issue before it, the litigation posture of the case hid the fact that Alabama is part of a disturbing pattern. Jurisdictions like Alabama have been applying not the Voting Rights Act, but a ham-handed cartoon of …

Who's Afraid Of The Hated Political Gerrymander?, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The political gerrymander has few friends among scholars and commentators. Even a majority on the Supreme Court agreed that the practice violates constitutional and democratic norms. And yet, this is one of the few issues that the US. Supreme Court refuses to regulate. The justices mask their refusal to regulate this area on a professed inability to divine judicially-manageable standards. In turn, scholars offer new standards for the justices to consider. This is not only a mistake but also misguided. The history of the political question doctrine makes clear that the discovery of manageable standards has never controlled the Court's …

November Madness: A Proposal For Representative Democracy Brackets To Eliminate The Undue Influence Of Money On Elections, Daniel P. Valentine

Texas A&M Law Review

This Comment proposes Representative Democracy Brackets, a multi-level manner of choosing candidates in which all voters have an equal voice, but which by its structure reduces the effect of mass marketing in favor of a focus on forming and evaluating interpersonal relationships. By implementing Representative Democracy Brackets, a state or the United States can achieve the twin benefits of decreasing the undue effects of political spending and increasing the quality of the resulting decisions. The proposed brackets winnow the pool of voters until it is small enough to make an informed decision.

This Comment defines the problem by reviewing the …

One Significant Step: How Reforms To Prison Districts Begin To Address Political Inequality, Erika L. Wood

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Skyrocketing rates of incarceration over the last three decades have had profound and lasting effects on the political power and engagement of local communities throughout the United States. Aggressive enforcement practices and mandatory sentencing laws have an impact beyond the individuals who are arrested, convicted, and incarcerated. These policies have wide-ranging and enduring ripple effects throughout the communities that are most heavily impacted by criminal laws, predominantly urban and minority neighborhoods. Criminal justice policies broadly impact everything from voter turnout and engagement, to serving on juries, participating in popular protests, census data, and the way officials draw legislative districts. The …

Election Law And Government Ethics, Christopher R. Nolen, Jeffrey S. Palmore

University of Richmond Law Review

This article surveys developments in Virginia election and government ethics laws for 2014 and 2015, with an emphasis on legislative developments. The focus is on those statutory developments thathave significance or general applicability to the implementation of Virginia's election and ethics laws.

Mapping The Treasure State: What States Can Learn From Redistricting In Montana, Caitlin Boland Aarab, The Honorable Jim Regnier

Montana Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re 2012 Legislative Districting: Maryland High Court Decision Exemplifies Lackluster Federal Guidance On Redistricting, Matthew Lagarde

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Recent History Of Gerrymandering In Florida: Revitalizing Davis V. Bandemer And Florida’S Constitutional Requirements On Redistricting, Devon Ombres

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Right Choice For Elections: How Choice Voting Will End Gerrymandering And Expand Minority Voting Rights, From City Councils To Congress, Rob Richie, Andrew Spencer

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Half-Century Of Virginia Redistricting Battles: Shifting From Rural Malapportionment To Voting Rights To Public Participation, Micah Altman, Michael P. Mcdonald

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Could The Best Of Tightrope Walkers Manage To Walk The Line Between Race-Consciousness And Race-Predominance? An Analysis Of Race-Based Districting In Light Of Miller V. Johnson, Sean Simpson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Democrats At Doj: Why Partisan Use Of The Voting Rights Act Might Not Be So Bad After All, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

In notable ways, the ongoing dispute over redistricting in Texas offers a mirror image to one of the major redistricting battles of the last decade, only with Democratic and Republican roles reversed. In both Texas v. United States and Georgia v. Ashcroft, a state attorney general (AG) decided he would not ask the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to approve new redistricting plans enacted in his state. In both cases, the state AGs were well aware that the Voting Rights Act (VRA) required them to obtain federal approval, known as preclearance, before changing any aspect of their state's election …

Community As A Redistricting Principle: Consulting Media Markets In Drawing District Lines, Jason C. Miller

Indiana Law Journal

With the 2011 redistricting process poised to commence across the country, debates are raging as to who should draw district lines, how to keep those individuals from drawing them for partisan advantage, and the best way to draw minority districts. This paper addresses the largely overlooked area of media markets. Districts drawn to conform with media markets experience higher voter turnout. Moreover, linking a city and its economically-connected suburbs together is simply common sense. Discussing the impact of district conformity, or lack thereof, with media market boundaries on campaign strategy, news reporting, voter participation, grassroots organizing, and candidate recruitment, this …

Reinforcing The Formidable Arsenal: Restoration Of Purposeful Discrimination As A Basis For Denial Of Section 5 Preclearance Under The Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, And Correta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization And Amendments Act Of 2006, Benjamin E. Griffith

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ratification Of Reapportionment Plans Drawn By Redistricting Commissions, Poonam Kumar

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Partisan gerrymandering is a danger that threatens the foundations of the American democratic structure. This Note argues that partisan gerrymandering must be eliminated in order to foster political competition and ensure government accountability. Without a judicial solution, redistricting commissions present a viable option to help cure the ills of partisan gerrymandering. This Note argues that automatic and mandatory state supreme court judicial review must be the process by which the redistricting plans drawn by these commissions are ratified. Automatic judicial review permits redistricting to remain a legislative task while giving the judiciary a quintessential judicial task. In addition, this Note …

What Is "Fair" Partisan Representation, And How Can It Be Constitutionalized? The Case For A Return To Fixed Election Districts, James A. Gardner

Journal Articles

A recent outpouring of public and academic criticism of gerrymandering raises difficult questions about when and under what circumstances the representation of political parties and their supporters can be considered fair. The difficulty is not, as Justice Kennedy recently suggested, that we lack consensual standards for evaluating the fairness of partisan representation. Such standards exist, but they tend to be subverted by the use of territorial districts. This occurs routinely because party and territory are conflicting and for the most part incommensurable principles upon which to found a system of legislative representation. The real question raised by gerrymandering is therefore …

Self-Defeating Minimalism, Adam B. Cox

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Everyone wants a piece of Tom DeLay. The former majority leader is under investigation and indictment, and even the Supreme Court threatened last Term to undo one of his signal achievements. In 2003, DeLay orchestrated a highly unusual mid-decade revision of Texas’s congressional map. The revised map was a boon to Republicans, shifting the Texas congressional delegation from 15 Republicans and 17 Democrats to 21 Republicans and 11 Democrats. The map was attacked as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander and a violation of the Voting Rights Act. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear those challenges in LULAC v. Perry, many …

Cultural Compactness, Daniel R. Oritz

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The Supreme Court’s opinions in LULAC v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, confounded expectation. While many believed that the Court would develop the law governing partisan gerrymandering in one direction or another, it did not. As exactly before, such claims are justiciable but there is no law to govern them. In other words, the courthouse doors are open, but until some plaintiff advances a novel theory persuasive to five justices, no claims will succeed. On the other hand, few expected the Court to make any major changes to doctrine under the Voting Rights Act and Shaw v. Reno. But LULAC …

This Way To The Egress And Other Reflections On Partisan Gerrymandering Claims In Light Of Lulac V. Perry, Bernard Grofman

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

After winning control of both houses of the legislature and the governorship, Texas Republicans eventually succeeded in redistricting Texas’s congressional seats in 2003, replacing a 2001 court-drawn plan. LULAC v. Perry reviewed a number of challenges to that second redistricting. The decision deals with a multiplicity of issues, including, most importantly, the standard for violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the nature of tests for unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. While there are some clear holdings in the case, several of them reflect different combinations of Justices in the majority and, since there are six different opinions, it …