Election Law Commons^™

Preferential Judicial Activism, Sudha Setty

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Frederick Douglass On Shelby County, Olympia Duhart

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Post Oppression, Christian B. Sundquist

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Legal Post-Racialism As An Instrument Of Racial Compromise In Shelby County V. Holder, Pantea Javidan

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Shelby County V. Holder: A Critical Analysis Of The Post-Racial Movement’S Relationship To Bystander Denial And Its Effect On Perceptions Of Ongoing Discrimination In Voting, Abra S. Mason

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Electoral Silver Linings After Shelby, Citizens United And Bennett, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Setting Congress Up To Fail, Margaret B. Kwoka

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Voting Game, Sarah R. Robinson

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Second Reconstruction Is Over, Robert V. Ward Jr.

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Still Fighting After All These Years: Minority Voting Rights 50 Years After The March On Washington, Deborah N. Archer

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Any Is Too Much: Shelby County V. Holder And Diminished Citizenship, Peter Halewood

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Demography And Democracy, Phyllis Goldfarb

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Past As Prologue: Shelby County V. Holder And The Risks Ahead, J. Corey Harris

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Elimination Dance, Sarah Jane Forman

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Eviscerating The Voting Rights Act And Moral Authority: Freedom To Discriminate Comes With A Price, Patricia A. Broussard

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Jackals, Tall Ships, And The Endless Forest Of Lies: Foreword To Symposium On The Voting Rights Act In The Wake Of Shelby County V. Holder, Anthony Paul Farley

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Voting Rights In Winter: The Death Of A Superstatute, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

The Voting Rights Act (“VRA”), the most successful civil rights statute in American history, is dying. In the recent Shelby County decision, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled that the anti-discrimination model, long understood as the basis for the VRA as originally enacted, is no longer the best way to understand today’s voting rights questions. As a result, voting rights activists need to face up to the fact that voting rights law and policy are at a critical moment of transition. It is likely the case that the superstatute we once knew as the VRA is no more and is never …

Race, Federalism, And Voting Rights, Guy-Uriel E. Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

In Shelby County v. Holder, the Court struck down an important provision of the Voting Rights Act, section 4, on federalism grounds. The Court argued that Congress no longer had the power to enact section 4 because of the “federalism costs” imposed by the Act and because the Act violated "basic principles" of federalism. Unfortunately, the Court failed to articulate the costs to federalism imposed by the Act, much less conduct a cost-benefit analysis in order to determine whether the benefits of the Act outweighed its costs. Moreover, the Court failed to discuss whether the Reconstruction Amendments ought to matter …

Enforcing The Fifteenth Amendment, Ellen D. Katz

Book Chapters

This chapter examines efforts to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment in the period from United States v. Reese through Shelby County v. Holder. Reese and Shelby County expose the most rigorous stance the Court has employed to review congressional efforts to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment, while the years in-between show Congress and the Court working more in tandem, at times displaying remarkable indifference to blatant violations of the Fifteenth Amendment, and elsewhere working cooperatively to help vindicate the Amendment’s promise. Defying simple explanation, this vacillation between cooperation and resistance captures the complex and deeply consequential way concerns about federal power, …

Justice Ginsburg's Umbrella, Ellen D. Katz

Book Chapters

Near the end of her dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, Justice Ginsburg suggested a simple analogy to illustrate why the regional protections of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) were still necessary. She wrote that “[t]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”

Race, Federalism, And Voting Rights, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Voting Rights Act In Winter: The Death Of A Superstatute, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The Voting Rights Act ("VRA "), the most successful civil rights statute in American history, is dying. In the recent Shelby County decision, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled that the anti-discrimination model, long understood as the basis for the VRA as originally enacted, is no longer the best way to understand today's voting rights questions. As a result, voting rights activists need to face up to the fact that voting rights law and policy are at a critical moment of transition. It is likely the case that the superstatute we once knew as the VRA is no more and is …

Governing And Deciding Who Governs, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that, "Campaign finance restrictions that pursue other objectives [than eradicating quid pro quo corruption or its appearance], we have explained, impermissibly inject the Government 'into the debate over who should govern.' And those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern."

This passage sounds great — after all, who could object to an attempt to purge official self-dealing, especially in the election-law context? And therein lies its insidiousness: this rousing language masks a programmatic attempt by Roberts and his colleagues to distance themselves rhetorically …

Judicial Diversity After Shelby County V. Holder, William Roth

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

In 2014, voters in ten of the fifteen states previously covered by the Voting Rights Act ("VRA") preclearance formula-including six of the nine states covered in their entirety-will go to the polls to elect or retain state supreme court justices. Yet despite the endemic underrepresentation of minorities on state benches and the judiciary's traditional role in fighting discrimination, scholars have seemingly paid little attention to how Shelby County v. Holder's suspension of the coverage formula in section 4(b) has left racial minorities vulnerable to retrogressive changes to judicial-election laws. The first election year following Shelby County thus provides a compelling …

Shelby And Section 3: Pulling The Voting Rights Act’S Pocket Trigger To Protect Voting Rights After Shelby County V. Holder, Paul M. Wiley

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dismissing Deterrence, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

The proposed Voting Rights Amendment Act of 20144 (VRAA)[...]’s new criteria defining when jurisdictions become subject to preclearance are acutely responsive to the concerns articulated in Shelby County[ v. Holder]. The result is a preclearance regime that, if enacted, would operate in fewer places and demand less from those it regulates. This new regime, however, would not only be more targeted and less powerful, but, curiously, more vulnerable to challenge. In fact, the regime would be more vulnerable precisely because it is so responsive to Shelby County. Some background will help us see why.

A Tale Of Two Minority Groups: Can Two Different Minority Groups Bring A Coalition Suit Under Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act Of 1965, Sara Michaloski

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Shelby And The Sisyphean Struggle For Black Enfranchisement, Rick Valelly

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

State's Rights, Last Rites, And Voting Rights, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

There are two ways to read the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County Alabama v. Holder: as a minimalist decision or as a decision that undermines the basic infrastructure of voting rights policy, law, and jurisprudence. In this Article, we present the case for reading Shelby County as deeply destabilizing. We argue that Shelby County has undermined three assumptions that are foundational to voting rights policy, law, and jurisprudence. First, the Court has generally granted primacy of the federal government over the states. Second, the Court has deferred to Congress particularly where Congress is regulating at the intersection of race …

Universalism And Civil Rights (With Notes On Voting Rights After Shelby), Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

After the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder, voting rights activists proposed a variety of legislative responses. Some proposals sought to move beyond measures that targeted voting discrimination based on race or ethnicity. They instead sought to eliminate certain problematic practices that place too great a burden on voting generally. Responses like these are universalist, because rather than seeking to protect any particular group against discrimination, they formally provide uniform protections to everyone. As Bruce Ackerman shows, voting rights activists confronted a similar set of questions—and at least some of them opted for a universalist approach—during the campaign …