Election Law Commons^™

Analyzing The Benefits Of Artificial Intelligence To Racially Inclusive Democracy, Spencer Overton

Utah Law Review

Over the past two decades—as the United States has grown more ethnically diverse—the U.S. Supreme Court has dismantled key voting rights protections, and state legislatures have erected a record number of voting restrictions. Largely oblivious to this growing gap in legal protections, several artificial intelligence (“AI”) optimists have claimed that AI can help usher in a more inclusive, participatory, and unbiased democracy. Such an outcome, however, is far from guaranteed. This Article is the first to comprehensively examine the extent to which AI—and the legal frameworks that regulate it—can advance racially inclusive democracy. It responds to the AI optimism literature …

Voting Rights: Litigating Materiality Under The Civil Rights Act, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

In recent years, plaintiffs have frequently invoked the Civil Rights Act's Materiality Provision as a basis for challenging state election laws. The Provision prevents states from denying a person's right to vote based on certain types of immaterial errors or omissions in his voter registration application or other election related filings. Historically, the Provision played an important role in combatting Jim Crow measures used to systematically disenfranchise African Americans. Today, it continues to protect voters from disenfranchisement based on minor, hypertechnical, picayune mistakes unrelated to their eligibility to vote. Some courts, however, have misinterpreted the Provision to prevent states from …

The Scope Of Election Litigation, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

One way to think about the scope of a case is based on the range of parties who are or must be involved in it. The broader a case's scope in this regard, the more burdensome and costly it can be for plaintiffs to file and the more complicated and time consuming it may be for a court to adjudicate. Requiring large numbers of parties to be involved in a case can sometimes effectively preclude otherwise meritorious suits from being filed. This is especially true in election law disputes which often arise under harried circumstances and can be subject to …

One's Health Versus One's Right To Vote: How The Covid-19 Pandemic Changed The Legal Landscape Of Absentee/Mail-In Voting In The United States From The 2020-2024 Election Cycles, Tracey B. Carter

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines how the COVID-19 pandemic reshaped the legal framework governing absentee and mail-in voting in the United States from 2020 through the 2024 election cycles. Through a comprehensive review of state statutes, election data, and litigation across multiple jurisdictions, the Article analyzes pre-pandemic absentee voting regimes, emergency modifications implemented during the 2020 election cycle, and post-pandemic developments in 2022 and 2024. It compares states that required an excuse for absentee voting with those adopting no-excuse or all-mail systems and evaluates the surge in mail-in ballot usage during the pandemic. The Article further surveys significant state-level lawsuits challenging absentee/mail-in …

Protecting Minority Representation In An Era Of Political Polarization And The Hollowing Out Of Voting Rights Protections, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has hollowed out various voting rights protections, leaving all voters—minority and nonminority—less protected in a politically polarized America. Surprisingly, the Court has continued to protect representation for minority race voters who live in racially polarized areas. However, minority race voters risk losing that protection, typically provided through majority-minority districts authorized under the Voting Rights Act, if they build cross-racial coalitions with their neighbors. Under the Court’s interpretation of the VRA, cross-racial voting coalitions may be less protected than local majorities comprised of a single race of voters. The loss of such protection could leave their …

Threading The Needle In Extreme Partisan Gerrymandering Cases, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Recent Supreme Court jurisprudence paints a grim picture for future reform to address extreme partisan gerrymandering. The decisions in Rucho v. Common Cause and Moore v. Harper appear to foreclose progress at both the federal and state level. Reformers must neither create unmanageable legal standards for adjudication in federal litigation, nor ask state courts to transgress ordinary bounds of judicial review when interpreting state laws that might address gerrymandering. But there remains a path forward that focuses on clear and detailed state constitutional mandates to curb gerrymandering practices. Beneath their rhetoric, these decisions support clear legal rules over broader democratic …

Narrow But Deep: The Mcculloch Principle, Collective-Action Theory, And Section Three Enforcement, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

In Trump v. Anderson, 144 S. Ct. 662 (2024), the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Colorado Supreme Court erred in excluding President Donald J. Trump from the Republican Party's primary ballot in the state.  The Court reasoned that the Constitution makes Congress, not the states, solely responsible for enforcing Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Scholars of Section 3 have demonstrated that Section 3 is self-executing, so the Court's rationale lacks a sound basis in the original or contemporary meaning of the text of the Civil War Amendments, the original intent of their drafters, or …

Voter Due Process And The "Independent" State Legislature, Michael P. Bellis

Northwestern University Law Review

In a series of opinions surrounding the 2020 presidential election, multiple U.S. Supreme Court Justices broke from precedent to signal support of the “independent state legislature theory” (ISLT), a formerly obscure interpretation of state legislatures’ power over the administration of federal elections. Proponents of the ISLT allege that the U.S. Constitution grants state legislatures plenary power in federal election contexts—including the power to discount ballots, redraw legislative maps, or appoint alternative slates of presidential electors. Although the Court denied certiorari in each case, across the denials four current Justices dissented because they considered the ISLT to be a proper interpretation …

Defeating De Facto Disenfranchisement Of Criminal Defendants, Neil Sobol

Faculty Scholarship

In a democracy, voting is not only an important civic duty but also a right that governments owe to their citizens. However, by operation of law, forty-eight states deny voting rights to individuals based on criminal convictions. Activists and scholars attack de jure disenfranchisement as an improper collateral consequence that disproportionately impacts people of color. Although recent years show substantial reforms to reenfranchise defendants, an estimated 5.17 million defendants remained ineligible to vote in 2020.

While efforts to address de jure disenfranchisement remain necessary, a problem that has received considerably less attention is the de facto disenfranchisement of criminal defendants …

Election Obstruction, Jason Marisam

Faculty Scholarship

In 2020 and 2022, multiple Republican county canvassers refused to perform their ministerial duty to approve election returns, obstructing the official certification of the results. The canvassers latched onto false claims of fraud and other conspiracies advanced by election deniers. They eventually relented because of court orders and public pressure. The elections produced official winners, and crisis was averted. But, as long as election denialism rots our political discourse, election obstruction by canvassers will be a persistent risk with significant dangers for our democracy. This Essay provides a brief history of election obstruction by canvassers, examines the modern link between …

Voting Justice: Why The Attack On Voting Rights Is Best Understood As A "Justice" Issue, Yalda Nia

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

Election Subversion And The Writ Of Mandamus, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

Election subversion threatens democratic self-governance. Recently, we have seen election officials try to manipulate the rules after an election, defy accepted legal procedures for dispute resolution, and try to delay results or hand an election to a losing candidate. Such actions, if successful, would render the right to vote illusory. These threats call for a response. But rather than recommend the development of novel tools to address the problem, this Article argues that a readily available mechanism is at hand for courts to address election subversion: the writ of mandamus. This Article is the first comprehensive piece to situate the …

One Person, How Many Votes? Measuring Prison Malapportionment, Ian Bollag-Miller

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

“One-person, one-vote” is a fundamental principle of democracy. In practice, however, vote distribution among population groups is often less than equal. Even in established democracies, prison malapportionment—the distribution of legislative seats by counting incarcerated people in their prisons’ districts rather than their home districts—is one example of a practice that distorts voter representation. Prison malapportionment allows less populous districts that house prisons to maximize their voting power at the expense of more densely populated districts from which many incarcerated people previously lived. While there has been significant scholarship on the causes and effects of prison malapportionment, there is no standard …

Depoliticizing The Supreme Court Through Term Limits: A Worthwhile Reform Effort, Kara King

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

The United States Supreme Court is in a legitimacy crisis. Americans are losing faith in the Supreme Court as an independent branch of government. As a result, policymakers and academics have put forth several proposals to reform the Court. The concept of an eighteen-year term limit maintains some bipartisan support and stands out as the most likely reform. This Article argues that term limits could help depoliticize the nomination process, bring greater stability to the Court, and restore confidence in the Court.

Taking History Seriously: Marjorie Taylor Greene, Reflections On Progressive Lawyering, And Section 3 Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Andrew G. Celli Jr.

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

History has lessons to teach, and lawyers can learn from and use history in ways other than by cherry-picking from it. This Article contends that, while American history may be vexed, progressive lawyers can fully embrace history and hold it up into the light for consideration, all in service of progressive ends.

This Article describes a recent litigation that illustrates the point. In March 2022, the Author, together with other lawyers and a non-partisan pro-democracy group, represented voters from Georgia’s fourteenth congressional district in their effort to disqualify U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from the Georgia ballot—based upon Section 3 …

Increasing Voter Investment In American Democracy: Proposals For Reform, Adam Drake

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Millions of Americans choose to stay home every election cycle. Polling suggests that these nonvoters are either apathetic with respect to the democratic process or feel alienated from the United States government. Reforms to the democratic system should focus on alleviating these sentiments, ultimately encouraging more voters to show up to the polls. As turnout increases, so too does the legitimacy and stability of the U.S. government.

With that goal in mind, this Article advocates for a five- prong approach to reforming the electoral system. The first proposed step is to eliminate unnecessary barriers to voting by establishing federal automatic …

I Hope Tilden Was Right, Jerry H. Goldfeder

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Updating Anderson-Burdick To Evaluate Partisan Manipulation

Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

This Article analyzes jurisprudence concerning the judicial review of election laws. It suggests that the United States Supreme Court’s approach should acknowledge the realities of political partisanship when reviewing challenged laws and regulations. Specifically, this Article proposes a judicial test to evaluate election laws for partisan biases using factors modeled on those employed by the Court in Gingles v. Thornburg. Simply put, the manipulation of election laws to pursue partisan advantages poses the greatest threat to our democracy. Accordingly, this Article concludes that protecting our democracy from election practices that benefit one party over another in the guise of …

A New Supreme Court Case Threatens Another Body Blow To Our Democracy, Katherine A. Shaw, Leah Litman, Carolyn Shapiro

Online Publications

When the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, the justices in the majority insisted they were merely returning the issue of abortion to the democratic process. But a case the court has announced it will hear in its October term could make that democratic process a lot less democratic.

Black Women And Voter Suppression, Carla Laroche

Scholarly Articles

Black women who are eligible to vote do so at consistently high rates during elections in the United States. For thousands of Black women, however, racism, sexism, and criminal convictions intersect to require them to navigate a maze of laws and policies that keep them from voting. With the alarming rate of convictions and incarceration of Black women, criminal law intersects with civil rights to bar their involvement in the electoral process. This voting ban is known as felony disenfranchisement, but it amounts to voter suppression.

By reconceptualizing voter suppression based on criminal convictions through the experiences of Black women’s …

The Dangerous Independent State Legislature Theory, Jason Marisam

Faculty Scholarship

In 2020, conservative justices and the Trump Campaign championed a theory, known as the independent state legislature doctrine, that claims voting rights protections in state constitutions do not apply to the election rules that state legislatures set for the federal elections in their states. Under the theory, state courts cannot review and enjoin these state election laws for state constitutional violations. This Article exposes the flaws and dangers of the independent state legislature theory. It deconstructs the justifications for its utility, revealing them as undertheorized and based on flawed assumptions of legislative behavior and flawed understandings of constitutional and institutional …

Gender, Voting Rights, And The Nineteenth Amendment, Paula A. Monopoli

Faculty Scholarship

One hundred years after the woman suffrage amendment became part of the United States Constitution, a federal court has held—for the first time—that a plaintiff must establish intentional discrimination to prevail on a direct constitutional claim under the Nineteenth Amendment. In adopting that threshold standard, the court simply reasoned by strict textual analogy to the Fifteenth Amendment and asserted that “there is no reason to read the Nineteenth Amendment differently from the Fifteenth Amendment.” This paper’s thesis is that, to the contrary, the Nineteenth Amendment is deserving of judicial analysis independent of the Fifteenth Amendment because it has a distinct …

Voting Rights For People With Diminished Mental Capacity, Courtney Schiffler

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survival Voting And Minority Political Rights, Douglas M. Spencer, Lisa Grow Sun, Brigham Daniels, Chantel Sloan, Natalie Blades

Publications

The health of American democracy has literally been challenged. The global pandemic has powerfully exposed a long-standing truth: electoral policies that are frequently referred to as "convenience voting" are really a mode of "survival voting" for millions of Americans. As our data show, racial minorities are overrepresented among voters whose health is most vulnerable, and politicians have leveraged these health disparities to subordinate the political voice of racial minorities.

To date, data about racial disparities in health has played a very limited role in assessing voting rights. A new health lens on the racial impacts of voting rules would beneficially …

Reifying Anderson-Burdick: Voter Protection In The Time Of Pandemic And Beyond, Keeley Gogul

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Meaning, History, And Importance Of The Elections Clause, Eliza Sweren-Becker, Michael Waldman

Washington Law Review

Historically, the Supreme Court has offered scant attention to or analysis of the Elections Clause, resulting in similarly limited scholarship on the Clause’s original meaning and public understanding over time. The Clause directs states to make regulations for the time, place, and manner of congressional elections, and grants Congress superseding authority to make or alter those rules.

But the 2020 elections forced the Elections Clause into the spotlight, with Republican litigants relying on the Clause to ask the Supreme Court to limit which state actors can regulate federal elections. This new focus comes on the heels of the Clause serving …

Thin And Thick Conceptions Of The Nineteenth Amendment Right To Vote And Congress's Power To Enforce It, Richard L. Hasen, Leah M. Litman

Articles

This Article, prepared for a Georgetown Law Journal symposium on the Nineteenth Amendment’s one-hundred-year anniversary, explores and defends a “thick” conception of the Nineteenth Amendment right to vote and Congress’s power to enforce it. A “thin” conception of the Nineteenth Amendment maintains that the Amendment merely prohibits states from enacting laws that prohibit women from voting once the state decides to hold an election. And a “thin” conception of Congress’s power to enforce the Nineteenth Amendment maintains that Congress may only supply remedies for official acts that violate the Amendment’s substantive guarantees. This Article argues the Nineteenth Amendment does more. …

A New Old Solution: Why The United States Should Vote By Mail-In Ballot, Annie Barouh

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Superfluous Fifteenth Amendment?, Travis Crum

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article starts a conversation about reorienting voting rights doctrine toward the Fifteenth Amendment. In advancing this claim, I explore an unappreciated debate—the “Article V debate”—in the Fortieth Congress about whether nationwide black suffrage could and should be achieved through a statute, a constitutional amendment, or both. As the first significant post-ratification discussion of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Article V debate provides valuable insights about the original public understandings of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and the distinction between civil and political rights.

The Article V debate reveals that the Radical Republicans’ initial proposal for nationwide black suffrage included both …

Why The Nineteenth Amendment Matters Today: A Guide For The Centennial, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

The story of the Nineteenth Amendment includes a half-century of social movement contestation over whether permitting women to vote would destroy or democratize the American family and the American constitutional structure. This Essay revisits that story—an unfinished narrative of both disappointment and hope—in the service of identifying reasons why it relates to the lives of contemporary Americans. The overarching objective of the Essay is to suggest that the full story of the Nineteenth Amendment has always involved much more than a narrow debate over a determinate decision rule regarding women’s access to the franchise. To accomplish that objective, the Essay …