Election Law Commons^™

Concealed Motives: Rethinking Fourteenth Amendment And Voting Rights Challenges To Felon Disenfranchisement, Lauren Latterell Powell

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Felon disenfranchisement provisions are justified by many Americans under the principle that voting is a privilege to be enjoyed only by upstanding citizens. The provisions are intimately tied, however, to the country’s legacy of racism and systemic disenfranchisement and are at odds with the values of American democracy. In virtually every state, felon disenfranchisement provisions affect the poor and communities of color on a grossly disproportionate scale. Yet to date, most challenges to the provisions under the Equal Protection Clause and Voting Rights Act have been unsuccessful, frustrating proponents of re-enfranchisement and the disenfranchised alike.

In light of those failures, …

Navigating The Post-Shelby Landscape: Using Universalism To Augment The Remaining Power Of The Voting Rights Act, Jesús N. Joslin

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Inventing Equal Sovereignty, Leah M. Litman

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder relied on the “fundamental principle” and “historic tradition” of equal sovereignty to hold one of the Voting Rights Act’s key provisions unconstitutional. Yet almost three years after Shelby County, and despite a recent wave of equal sovereignty challenges to major federal programs, the equal sovereignty principle remains largely unexamined. This Article seeks to provide some clarity—both to establish the contours of the equal sovereignty doctrine and to evaluate whether it is a sound rule of constitutional federalism. The principle of equal sovereignty, as initially articulated by courts and subsequently …

The Law Of Democracy At A Crossroads: Reflecting On Fifty Years Of Voting Rights And The Judicial Regulation Of The Political Thicket, Franita Tolson

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rescuing Retrogression, Michael J. Pitts

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Voter Welfare: An Emerging Rule Of Reason In Voting Rights Law, Samuel Issacharoff

Indiana Law Journal

For the first time in at least a generation, the central focus of voting rights law has returned to the issue of eligibility to cast a ballot and the act of voting itself. Unlike in prior generations, the fights over voting are centrally part of a partisan battle for electoral supremacy and are not organized around perpetuating the historic sub-ordination of minority populations—whatever the localized impact on minorities that the new voting rules may trigger. In the partisan environment, courts face claims of exclusion that only imperfectly map onto constitutional prohibitions of discrimina-tory intent or statutory protections of minority voting …

What The Marriage Equality Cases Tell Us About Voter Id, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

Two years ago, United States u. Windsor tossed out the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"). Thereafter, proponents of marriage equality secured dozens of notable victories in the lower courts, a smattering of setbacks, and last June, the victory they sought in Obergefell v. Hodges. During this same period, opponents of electoral restrictions such as voter identification have seen far less sustained success. Decided the day before Windsor, Shelby County v. Holder scrapped a key provision of the Voting Rights Act ("VRA") while making clear that plaintiffs might still challenge disputed voting regulations under Section 2 of the VRA and the …

Who Should Be Afforded More Protection In Voting – The People Or The States? The States, According To The Supreme Court In Shelby County V. Holder, Tara M. Darling

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Transformation: Turning Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act Into Something It Is Not, J. Christian Adams

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Voter Rights And Civil Rights Era Cold Cases: Section Five And The Five Cities Project, Paula C. Johnson

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

An “Equal Sovereignty” Principle Born In Northwest Austin, Texas, Raised In Shelby County, Alabama, David Kow

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Path Forward From Shelby County V. Holder, Janet W. Steverson

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Grandpa, Charles Walker

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Unseen Exclusions In Voting And Immigration Law, César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Shelby, Race, And Disability Rights, Ravi Malhotra

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

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.

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.

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

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.

Election Law—Introduction, Jessica A. Levinson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Nevada Youth Learn About Voting Rights, Rachel J. Anderson

Scholarly Works

Prof. Rachel Anderson describes the second Youth Voting Rights Project, an event created by Prof. Anderson in collaboration with Dr. Zachary Robbins, Clark County School District principal, to help educate Nevadan high school and middle school students on the topic of election law.

Prof. Anderson also comments on the controversy surrounding Voter ID laws and the question of whether and to what degree the United States has made progress in fulfilling the promise of the Voting Rights Act.

Administering Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Douglas M. Spencer

Publications

Until the Supreme Court put an end to it in Shelby County v. Holder, section 5 of the Voting Rights Act was widely regarded as an effective, low-cost tool for blocking potentially discriminatory changes to election laws and administrative practices. The provision the Supreme Court left standing, section 2, is generally seen as expensive, cumbersome, and almost wholly ineffective at blocking changes before they take effect. This Article argues that the courts, in partnership with the Department of Justice, could reform section 2 so that it fills much of the gap left by the Supreme Court's evisceration of section …

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 …

Campaign Finance And Political Gerrymandering Decisions In The October 2005 Term, Burt Neuborne

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.