Election Law Commons^™

An Anniversary Best Uncelebrated: The 75th Year Of The Presidential Succession Act Of 1947, Roy E. Brownell Ii, John Rogan

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

On July 18, 1947, President Harry Truman signed the Presidential Succession Act into law. The 1947 Act placed the Speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tempore in the presidential line of succession. Seventy-five years later, the statute needs major revision. Although the 1947 Act has not been used, the nation’s good fortune may change at any moment, especially given ever-present threats to the health and safety of the president and vice president.

This Article argues that Congress should revise the 1947 law in several ways, most notably by making Cabinet secretaries, in most circumstances, the immediate successors …

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 …

Making It Harder To Challenge Election Districting, Erwin Chemerinsky

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The Consent Of The Governed And The Right To Access The Ballot, John D. Feerick

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

I Hope Tilden Was Right, Jerry H. Goldfeder

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Textualism, Judicial Supremacy, And The Independent State Legislature Theory, Leah M. Litman, Katherine A. Shaw

Articles

This piece offers an extended critique of one aspect of the so-called "independent state legislature" theory. That theory, in brief, holds that the federal Constitution gives state legislatures, and withholds from any other state entity, the power to regulate federal elections. Proponents ground their theory in two provisions of the federal Constitution: Article I's Elections Clause, which provides that "[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof," and Article H's Presidential Electors Clause, which provides that "[e]ach State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature …

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 …

The Positive And Negative Purcell Principle, Harry B. Dodsworth

Utah Law Review

The Purcell Principle—the idea that courts should think twice about changing the rules before elections to avoid confusing voters—is sorely misunderstood. Despite deriving from a three-page opinion, the Purcell Principle has morphed into one of the Supreme Court’s most powerful election-law doctrines. By and large, the Court has interpreted the principle as a bright-line rule barring any judicial intervention close to elections and has overwhelmingly used the principle to uphold voting restrictions. That’s a problem because the Purcell Principle is not a bright-line rule. And it’s certainly not one that rubber stamps voting restrictions. To make matters worse, we know …

The Court’S Gerrymandering Conundrum: How Hyper-Partisanship In Politics Alters The Rucho Decision, Vince Mancini

Utah Law Review

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rucho v. Common Cause was the latest in a line of opinions regarding reviewability of gerrymandering claims related to the constitutionally required decennial state redistricting process. In Rucho, the Court altered the course of future electoral processes and held that partisan gerrymandering claims were nonjusticiable. In doing so, the Court failed to consider obvious pitfalls in limiting the type of review available for these gerrymandering claims. In particular, the Court failed to understand the gravity of the impact such a decision would have on minority voting power and discarded one of the few structural …

Bizwayo Newton Nkunika V Lawrence Nyirenda And Electoral Commission Of Zambia 2019/Ccz/005 (1 March 2021), O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Professor Derek T. Muller In Support Of Applicant, Thomas R. Lee, John J. Nielsen, Tyler B. Lindley, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 22A337
Senator Lindsey Graham v. Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury

On emergency application for a stay and injunction pending appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

From the Introduction and Summary of Argument

The merits of this case are colored by partisan overtones. But the overarching legal questions implicate nonpartisan, institutional concerns. The Speech or Debate Clause has deep historical roots that protect important interests in legislative independence. That independence requires strong protection for legislative inquiry under an objective standard rooted in the facial basis for a particular investigation. If courts intrude on …

Brief For Amicus Curiae Professor Derek T. Muller In Support Of Respondents, Daniel M. Sullivan, Daniel M. Horowitz, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 21-1271
Timothy K. Moore v. Rebecca Harper

On Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina

From the Summary of Argument

The petition for certiorari in this case presents the question whether the phrase “Legislature thereof” in the Elections Clause of the Constitution bars state courts from regulating the contours of Congressional redistricting pursuant to state constitutions. But Congress has spoken, too. It has regulated the manner of drawing congressional districts by federal statute. See 2 U.S.C. § 2c. Congressional redistricting in a State now takes place pursuant to this federal statutory directive, which contemplates a role …

More On The Varying Meanings Of “Congress” And “Legislature”, Michael Herz

Online Publications

In a recent Election Law Blog post regarding the Independent State Legislature doctrine, Rick Pildes observes that the term “Congress” in the U.S. Constitution sometimes means Congress acting alone and sometimes means Congress acting through legislation. Given that, it makes perfect sense that the term “legislature” can also sometimes mean the one and sometimes the other. I agree. This post just expands the intratextual analysis.

Why The President Should Remain Commander In Chief Of The D.C. National Guard, Christopher F. Melling

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Conference Of Chief Justices In Support Of Neither Party, Moore V. Harper, No. 21-1271 (U.S. Sept. 6, 2022), Evan Caminker, Carter G. Phillips, Virginia A. Seitz, Kathleen M. Mueller

Appellate Briefs

Founded in 1949, amicus curiae Conference of Chief Justices (the “Conference”) is comprised of the Chief Justices or Chief Judges of the courts of last resort in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. For over 70 years, the Conference has been a leading national voice on important issues concerning the administration of justice in state courts, the operation of state courts and judicial systems, and the role of state courts in our federal system.

The Conference files briefs …

Donald Trump And America's New Class War, Glenn Harlan Reynolds

Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

Voting By Proxy-Meddling In Foreign Elections And Public International Law, Patrick C. R. Terry

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Following the alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US presidential election, there has been noticeable interest in the lawfulness of foreign interference in another state's elections under public international law. The obvious lack of previous research on the issue is surprising, given that election meddling in other states has been a widespread practice since at least the end of World War II. Indeed, according to Dov Levin, between 1946 and 2000, the United States and the Soviet Union (and Russia) alone were responsible for 117 partisan "electoral interventions" in other states. What is more, meddling in foreign elections is effective. …

Education Freedom Pac V. Reid, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (June 28, 2022), Servando Martinez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This appeal comes from a district court order enjoining an initiative petition’s circulation and the initiative’s placement on the ballot. In an opinion drafted by Justice Hardesty, the Court considered whether the district court properly denied EFP’s request to dismiss the complaint because the district court had not set the matter for a hearing within 15 days. The Court acknowledges that, under the Nevada Constitution, an initiative petition cannot require appropriations or expenditures, must adequately inform potential signatories about the petition’s goal, and cannot invade the Legislature’s primary role of proposing and enacting laws. The Court concluded that that the …

Cegavske V. Hollowood, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (June 28, 2022), Servando Martinez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In an opinion drafted by Justice Stiglich, the Court considered whether initiative sponsors may withdraw a petition or whether an initiative petition’s signatories or the public acquire any rights in a petition. This appeal involves two verified initiative petitions to place questions on the ballot for the Nevada 2022 general election and the sponsors' withdrawal of the initiative petitions. Although Nevada law provides a procedure to withdraw an initiative petition and directs that “no further action may be taken on [a withdrawn] petition,”2 Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske refused to honor the withdrawals of the two petitions at issue here. …

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.