Election Law Commons^™

Upending Minority Rule: The Case For Ranked-Choice Voting In West Virginia, Matthew R. Massie

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Locked Up, Then Locked Out: The Case For Legislative - Rather Than Executive - Felon Disenfranchisement Reform, Amanda J. Wong

Cornell Law Review

A cohesive anti-felon disenfranchisement perspective has gained traction over the last two decades in America. Scholars have harshly criticized disenfranchisement provisions for their insulation and perpetuation of nonwhite marginalization d la Jim Crow. Other critics have also decried felon disenfranchisement for barring prior felons from full social integration. Still more critics point to how disenfranchisement provisions inequitably affect election outcomes. State leaders, recognizing the prevalent attitude against felon disenfranchisement, have taken significant measures to mitigate disenfranchisement laws-for example, some state governors have issued executive orders categorically re-enfranchising ex-felons. These types of actions are the focus on this Note. Certainly, unilateral …

Some Thoughts On Joaquin Ávila, Bill Tamayo

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

“We Are Still Citizens, Despite Our Regrettable Past” Why A Conviction Should Not Impact Your Right To Vote, Jaime Hawk, Breanne Schuster

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Remembrance, One Person, One Vote: The Enduring Legacy Of Joaquin Avila, Robert Chang

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Counterfeit Campaign Speech, Rebecca Green

Faculty Publications

We are entering an era in which computers can manufacture highly-sophisticated images, audio, and video of people doing and saying things they have, in fact, not done or said. In the context of political campaigns, the danger of “counterfeit campaign speech” is existential. Do current laws adequately regulate faked candidate speech? Can counter speech effectively neutralize it? Because it takes place in the vaulted realm of core political speech, would the First Amendment stymie any attempt to outlaw it? Many smart people who have looked at the general problem of deceit in campaigns have concluded that the state has no …

Joaquin Ávila: Voting Rights Gladiator, Barbara Y. Philips

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Shaw Claim: The Rise And Fall Of Colorblind Jurisprudence, Molly P. Matter

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Special Norms Thesis: Why Congress's Constitutional Decisionmaking Should Be Disciplined By More Than The Usual Norms Of Politics, Mark D. Rosen

Cardozo Law Review

Even if we accept that the most basic rules of fair play do not apply to our nation's political representatives when they battle one another in the ordinary lawmaking process, we should demand more when they engage in constitutional decision-making. This Article explains why our constitutional system demands different rules of engagement when constitutional questions are at issue, and exactly what we should expect of members of Congress in these situations.

Lieberman Et Al. V. Cassif Et Al., Esther Hayut, Neal Hendel, Uzi Vogelman, Isaac Amit, Noam Sohlberg, Menachem Mazuz, Anat Baron, George Karra, David Mintz

Translated Opinions

1.         On March 6, 2019, the Central Elections Committee for the 21^st Knesset approved a request for the disqualification of Dr. Ofer Cassif from running as a candidate for the Knesset on the Hadash-Ta’al list but rejected a request to disqualify the Hadash-Ta’al list. The Committee further accepted two requests to disqualify the Ra’am-Balad list and rejected three requests to disqualify Dr. Michael Ben Ari and Advocate Itamar Ben Gvir from standing for election. The decision to disqualify Cassif was submitted to the Supreme Court for approval, as required under sec. 7A(b) of Basic Law: The Knesset and sec. …

The Signature Of Gerrymandering In Rucho V. Common Cause, Andrew Chin, Gregory Herschlag, Jonathan Mattingly

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Soft Law Meets Hard Politics: Taming The Wild West Of Nonprofit Political Involvement, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer

Journal of Legislation

Beginning in the 1990s and continuing today, many of the legal and psychological barriers to nonprofits becoming involved in electoral politics have fallen. At the same time, political divisions have sharpened, causing candidates, political parties, and their supporters to scramble more aggressively for any possible edge in winner-take-all political contests. In the face of these developments, many nonprofits have violated the remaining legal rules applicable to their political activity with little fear of negative consequences, especially given vague rules and a paucity of enforcement resources. Such violations include under reporting of political activity in government filings, fly-by-night organizations that exist …

Be Careful What You Wish For: Private Political Parties, Public Primaries, And State Constitutional Restrictions, Hugh D. Spitzer

Washington Law Review

Political parties always disliked the Progressive Era changes that pulled the entire electorate into nominating candidates. Why, after all, should non-party members participate in the affairs and choices of private organizations? Over the course of a century, Democrats, Republicans, and minor parties repeatedly mounted lawsuits to attack new primary laws, and they eventually prevailed on a key constitutional issue: the First Amendment right of association. But when political actors access the courts for strategic purposes, they can get caught in the vagaries of history and public attitudes, with outcomes they might not like. This Essay focuses on the history of …

Notice, Due Process, And Voter Registration Purges, Anthony J. Gaughan

Cleveland State Law Review

In the 2018 case of Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, a divided United States Supreme Court upheld the procedures that Ohio election authorities used to purge ineligible voters from the state’s registration lists. In a 5-4 ruling, the majority ruled that the Ohio law complied with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) as amended by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). This Article contends that the controlling federal law—the NVRA and HAVA—gave the Supreme Court little choice but to decide the case in favor of Ohio’s secretary of state. But this article also argues …

Vying To Be King Of The Jungle: Where Top-Two Primaries Fall Short, Taylor Larson, Joshua A. Duden

Concordia Law Review

Top-two primaries pose significant constitutional issues for political parties, but primary system selection is also a significant policy question for each state. Primary elections have served as a filter for candidates to enter the general election; however, primaries are predominantly party functions. Although the process varies from state-to-state and is regulated by individual state legislatures, primary elections allow voters of a particular party to nominate the candidate they think best represents them against other parties in the general election. To combat partisan politics, Washington and California have grappled with election reform by adopting a "top-two" primary system. This version of …

Raila Odinga And Others V Independent Electoral And Boundaries Commission And Others [2013] Klr-Sck Petition No.5 Of 2013 & No. 1 Of 2017, Teddy J.O. Musiga

SAIPAR Case Review

Since the establishment of the Supreme Court of Kenya in 2011, it has so far determined two disputes arising from presidential election petitions. From the outset, it is important to clarify that this commentary does not purport to review the decisions of the 2013 and 2017 presidential election petitions. It only seeks to review and critique one salient aspect that emerges from the Supreme Court of Kenya’s approach in the treatment of rejected votes in those presidential election disputes.

The case note criticises the Supreme Court of Kenya’s approach which seems to favour the exclusion of rejected votes in the …

Crafting A Corporate Analogue To Criminal Disenfranchisement, B. Graves Lee Jr.

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC represented a sea change in the world of corporate citizenship. Although the decision dealt with campaign finance law, it has sparked significant discussion of the concept of corporate personhood more broadly. Corporations have increasingly taken advantage of legal rights previously reserved for individuals. This Note argues that where corporations reap the benefits of constitutional entitlements intended for individuals, they should suffer consequences for malfeasance similar to those imposed on individuals who engage in criminal conduct. Specifically, this Note advocates for limitations on corporate electioneering as a collateral consequence of a …

The Locked Gates To Tension City: The Commission On Presidential Debates, The Fec, And The Two-Party System, Tommy La Voy

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Since John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon walked into a Chicago television studio for the first general election presidential debate in 1960, candidate debates have been a fundamental aspect of presidential campaigns and have had broader effects on society at large. The Commission on Presidential Debates (“CPD”) has been in charge of organizing the general election debates since it was created in 1987 by the Democratic and Republican parties. In its tenure, the CPD has restricted its massive platform almost every election to the Republican and Democratic candidates through the use of criteria that seemingly follow the law’s requirement of …

Daniel Pule And Others V Attorney General And Others 2017/Ccz/004 Selected Judgment No. 60 Of 2018, Elias C. Chipimo

SAIPAR Case Review

In a case brought to determine the eligibility of President Edgar Lungu to stand as a presidential candidate in 2021, having served less than three years in his first term, the Constitutional Court determined that: ‘…the presidential tenure of office that ran from January 25, 2015 to September 13, 2016 and straddled two constitutional regimes, cannot be considered as a full term.’

In doing so, the Constitutional Court effectively backdated the application of the ‘New Clauses’ to a time when there was already a law governing: (a) the eligibility of a person to stand again as a presidential candidate who …

Nelson Chamisa V Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa And Others Ccz 42/18 (August 2018), O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

Zimbabwe held its first post-Mugabe general elections on 30th July 2018. On 3rd August 2018, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) declared Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa as the candidate who received the requisite ‘more than half the number of votes cast’ and declared duly elected President of Zimbabwe. Aggrieved by this development, Nelson Chamisa, the main opposition contender, challenged the validity of the election of Mnangagwa in the Constitutional Court. After hearing the case, the Constitutional Court unanimously: 1) Dismissed the application with costs; and 2) Declared Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa as duly elected President of Zimbabwe.