Election Law Commons^™

Voting Under The Federal Constitution, Travis Crum

Scholarship@WashULaw

There is no explicit, affirmative right to vote in the federal Constitution. At the Founding, States had total discretion to choose their electorate. Although that electorate was the most democratic in history, the franchise was largely limited to property-owning White men. Over the course of two centuries, the United States democratized, albeit in fits and starts. The right to vote was often expanded in response to wartime service and mobilization.

A series of constitutional amendments prohibited discrimination in voting on account of race (Fifteenth), sex (Nineteenth), inability to pay a poll tax (Twenty-Fourth), and age (Twenty-Sixth). These amendments were worded …

Pengembalian Fungsi Pengawasan Pemilu Kepada Masyarakat Sebagai Wujud Penyelenggaraan Pemilu Yang Demokratis, Burhan Robith Dinaka, Fitra Arsil

Jurnal Konstitusi & Demokrasi

Elections as a means of implementing people's sovereignty which are held directly, publicly, freely, confidentially, honestly and fairly within the territory of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia which are based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia also mandate a model of election supervision through Bawaslu as the election organizing institution whose task is to observe, review, inspect and assess the election implementation process so that it runs in accordance with the provisions of applicable laws and regulations. The ongoing strengthening of positions, duties, functions and authority within Bawaslu has left a number …

Electoral Sandbagging, Lisa Manheim

UC Irvine Law Review

An insidious tactic threatens elections across the United States. Some refer to it as a “bait and switch.” Others recognize a form of “election sabotage.” While the labels vary, the pattern is the same. First, an election official or other figure of authority consents to an error at an early stage of the election process. The actor then waits to see how the election unfolds. If the election results are favorable, the error slides into irrelevance. If not, that same actor refers back to the earlier error, now with indignity, and insists that it requires a late-stage disruption of the …

Americans For Prosperity Foundation V. Bonta: Protecting Free Speech And Its Implications For Campaign Finance Disclosures, Sara Lindsay Neier

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In 2021, the United States Supreme Court in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta considered the anonymous speech rights of charitable donors against the California Attorney General’s interest in preventing wrongdoing by charitable organizations. The Court applied exacting scrutiny, a standard traditionally applied to campaign finance disclosure laws, determining that California’s requirement was facially invalid as a violation of associational rights. Bonta did not concern campaign finance, making this application of exacting scrutiny novel. This Article considers the open questions raised by Bonta regarding how exacting scrutiny should be applied and what it means for the future of campaign finance …

The Case For Federal Deference To State Court Redistricting Rulings: Lessons From Ohio’S Districting Disaster, John Sullivan Baker

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In a watershed 2015 referendum, Ohioans decisively approved a state constitutional amendment that prohibited partisan gerrymandering of General Assembly districts and created the Ohio Redistricting Commission. Though the amendment mandated that the Commission draw proportional maps not primarily designed to favor or disfavor a political party, the Commission—composed of partisan elected officials—repeatedly enacted unconstitutional, heavily gerrymandered districting plans in blatant defiance of the Ohio Supreme Court.

After the Ohio Supreme Court struck down four of the Commission’s plans, leaving Ohio without state House and Senate maps just months before the 2022 general election, a group of voters sued in the …

Why We Can’T Have Nice Things: Equality, Proportionality, And Our Abridged Voting Rights Regime, Michael Latner

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

What constraints should the protection of political equality place on the design of electoral systems? With the exception of requiring approximate population equality across a jurisdiction’s districts, the U.S. voting rights regime accepts substantial disproportionality in voting strength. This Article addresses the current Supreme Court’s abandonment of the Second Reconstruction’s “one person, one vote” standard with regard to both racial and partisan gerrymandering, and assesses the role that Congress and political science have played in this transition. This Article argues that an unabridged voting rights regime must recognize a standard of proportional representation derived from the protection of individual political …

Discriminatory Intent Claims Under Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, Amandeep S. Grewal

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

This Article addresses a new controversy over whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits laws that exhibit “only” discriminatory intent, in the absence of discriminatory results. Lower courts have long embraced an intent approach for Section 2. And the Department of Justice has rested its entire ongoing case against Georgia’s controversial voting bill on an intent approach.

However, this Article shows that the Supreme Court’s decision in Brnovich v. DNC effectively rejects the intent approach to Section 2. In April 2023, the Eleventh Circuit reversed its prior cases and now rejects an intent theory. This puts in peril …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

“Better Luck Next Election”: Late-Jailed Voters’ Constitutional Right To Vote After Mays V. Larose., Grace Thomas

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

Abstract Forthcoming.

Towards A Strengthening Of Non-Interference, Sovereignty, And Human Rights From Foreign Cyber Meddling In Democratic Electoral Processes, Francesco Seatzu, Nicolás Carrillo-Santarelli

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

States have resorted to meddling in the elections of their counterparts throughout history. Recently, though, there has been an exponential increased in the use of the possibilities provided by technology. Attention to this phenomenon has deservedly grown quickly and exponentially. This has led to debates focusing on the adequacy of international legal rules and general principles to respond to foreign cyber election interference. In many of these debates some have expressed doubts and skepticism about the adequacy of current international law to confront foreign election interference through cyber means. There have also been disagreements about the applicable standards to fight …

Judicial Selection That Fails The Separation Of Powers, Stephen Ware

Catholic University Law Review

Executive power should be constrained by checks and balances. The United States’ long and strong tradition of concerns about executive power, and its complementary tradition of Madisonian checks and balances on and to the executive, include the selection of supreme court justices. Neither the U.S. Constitution nor the constitution of any state places solely in the executive the power to appoint a justice to begin a new term on the (federal or state) supreme court. However, several states fail to constrain gubernatorial power in selecting justices to finish a term already started by another justice and these interim appointments are …

Disinformation And The First Amendment: Fraud On The Public, Wes Henricksen

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Following the 2020 presidential election, the losing candidate, Donald Trump, along with most of the Republican Party, spread the false claim that the election had been stolen by Democrats. Joe Biden, so the claim went, had not been legitimately elected, and was therefore an illegitimate President and needed to be removed. This profitable falsehood6 became known as the “Big Lie.” It was not only baseless, but it was in fact made in spite of and in direct conflict with the overwhelming evidence debunking it. This did not stop people from believing it. Millions bought into the Big Lie, which …

Partisan Gerrymandering: The Promise And Limits Of State Court Judicial Review, Norman R. Williams

Marquette Law Review

In 2021, the Oregon Legislature succeeded in redrawing the state’s legislative and congressional districts, but the new redistricting plans were immediately challenged in state court as partisan gerrymanders. The Oregon Supreme Court rejected the challenge to the state legislative map, but its analysis, which accorded significant deference to the legislature’s choices, raised more questions than answers about the appropriate level of scrutiny for state redistricting plans. A special, five-judge court likewise rejected the gerrymandering challenge to the congressional map, and, while its analysis was less deferential, its decision also left unanswered the fundamental question regarding at what point a redistricting …

Illuminating The Shadow Docket: On The Increasing Impacts Of This Evolving Judicial Procedure, Sarah Voehl

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Acting Cabinet Secretaries And The Twenty-Fifth Amendment, James A. Heilpern

University of Richmond Law Review

The Twenty-Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution contains a mechanism that enables the Vice President, with the support of a majority of the Cabinet, to temporarily relieve the President of the powers and duties of the Presidency. The provision has never been invoked, but was actively discussed by multiple Cabinet Secretaries in response to President Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021. News reports indicate that at least two Cabinet Secretaries—Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin—tabled these discussions in part due to uncertainties about how to operationalize the Amendment. Specifically, the Secretaries were concerned that the …

Keeping The Faith: How The Fourteenth Amendment Should Protect Against Faithless Electors, Jennifer A. Cranmer

Akron Law Review

Every four years, citizens across the United States vote for a presidential candidate. However, those citizens are actually voting for electors who then vote for the president in the Electoral College on the citizens’ behalf. Electors become faithless when they do not vote for the candidate that they were pledged to vote for. In Chiafalo v. Washington, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of states enacting strict faithless elector laws that require electors to vote for the candidates they were pledged to vote for and impose penalties on electors who fail to do so. Yet many states have failed …

Sacred Spheres: Religious Autonomy As An International Human Right, Diana V. Thomson, Kayla A. Toney

Catholic University Law Review

How should courts resolve thorny human rights disputes that arise within religious groups? According to an emerging international consensus, they shouldn’t. When a case involves sensitive internal decisions by a religious organization, such as choosing who is qualified to teach the faith, courts are increasingly taking a hands-off approach. This global consensus has formed across international treaties, tribunals, and domestic courts in European and American nations. Every major human rights instrument and many international and domestic courts recognize that religious freedom must extend to religious communities, especially houses of worship and schools where believers gather to practice their faith and …

Voting Rights And The Electoral Process: Resolving Representation Issues Due To Felony Disenfranchisement And Prison Gerrymandering, Andrew Calabrese, Tim Gordon, Tianyi Lu

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Third Parties And The Electoral College: How Ranked Choice Voting Can Stop The Third-Party Disruptor Effect, Hillary Bendert, Jacqueline Hayes, Kevin Ruane

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Presidential Election Disruptions: Balancing The Rule Of Law And Emergency Response, Jason D'Andrea, Sonia Montejano, Matthew Vaughan

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.