• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

Hide Search

Election Law Society

Nebraskan Improprieties: They’re Only Illegal If the Legislature Says So

Election Law Society · May 16, 2013 ·

Public corruption is something all Americans abhor, even the appearance of it.  That is especially true when it comes to our elections, the fundamental building blocks of the democratic process.  But acts of corruption are only illegal to the extent that the law says so.  One cannot commit an illegal act where the law does not prohibit such conduct.  Christopher Geary, a one-time hopeful for the Nebraska Legislature, is living proof of this principle.

Nebraska’s 7th Legislative District encompasses parts of downtown Omaha and neighboring Douglas County.  During the 2012 election cycle, District 7’s residing incumbent was Jeremy Nordquist.  Christopher Geary challenged Nordquist in the officially non-partisan primary and funded his campaign with mostly personal expenditures.  Geary ultimately lost by a significant margin.  Instead of immediately removing his name from the general election ballot, however, Geary decided to attempt a recovery of his personal funds spent on the campaign.  He did so with the following email to Nordquist:  [Read more…] about Nebraskan Improprieties: They’re Only Illegal If the Legislature Says So

The NVRA’s Privacy Problem

Election Law Society · May 6, 2013 ·

by Scott Van Der Hyde, Contributor

A recent 4th Circuit opinion has highlighted a possible conflict that exists between the National Voter Registration Acts (NVRA) transparency provisions and concerns over voter privacy.  In Project Vote v. Young, the 4th Circuit attempted to resolve a conflict between the NVRA’s requirement that states make available for public review records pertaining to the implementation of voter registration programs and activities, and a Virginia law that prohibits disclosing many voter registration records.  The court ultimately resolved this issue in favor of the NVRA’s disclosure requirement.  While resolving the issue in this particular case, the court’s decision has the potential to raise new issues in terms of what must be disclosed and gives rise to a number of privacy concerns. [Read more…] about The NVRA’s Privacy Problem

The Plight of Third-Party Organizations attempting to Register Voters in Florida

Election Law Society · April 23, 2013 ·

by Aaron Carter, Associate Editor

Alberto, Ernesto, Florence and Valerie are all names of Atlantic Ocean hurricanes that have taken shape in 2012.  As of now they are 4 of the 21 hurricanes we have seen this season.  Hurricane season in Florida ranges from bad to worse depending on the storm systems that are cooked up in any given year.  Still, a hurricane or any other type of force majeure will not exonerate a third party organization for not turning in voter registration forms within the 48-hour window provided under Fla. Stat. § 97.0575 and implementing rule 1S 2.042.  HB1355, which passed in 2011 and amended the statute states, “[T]he fines provided in this subsection shall be reduced by three-fourths in cases in which the third party voter registration organization’s failure to deliver the voter registration application within the required timeframe is based upon force majeure or impossibility of performance.”  Third-party organizations have been in a battle over various changes in election law the past two years. The regulations of third-party organizations registering voters in Florida have been adjudicated in court, but its effects may last until Election Day with significant consequences for a pivotal election.  [Read more…] about The Plight of Third-Party Organizations attempting to Register Voters in Florida

Be careful what you wish for: MD’s centralized voter registration too efficient?

Election Law Society · April 16, 2013 ·

by Anna Killius, Contributor

So much can go wrong before a voter ever reaches the voting booth. Voters encounter registration requirements, polling place assignments and identification law confusion. On Election Day, long lines and chilly temperatures can test the fortitude of even the most dedicated citizens. But imagine waiting for hours and dutifully handing over your driver’s license and voter registration card, only to be told that you are missing from the poll books. According to the Maryland State Board of Elections, you no longer live at your address, and your precinct has been changed. This is precisely what Christopher Lochner faced when he arrived at the Hereford polling station on November 6th, and he may not have been alone. With Maryland’s centralized voter registration system, it is now easier for voters to inadvertently signal a change of address, potentially leaving displaced and disgruntled voters to cast provisional ballots.

Centralized, computerized systems are a relatively recent addition to the election process, but, for Maryland, the idea is nothing new. After the 1994 gubernatorial election was decided by less than 6,000 votes, Governor Glendening created a 13-member task force to investigate and suggest reforms for the Maryland election system. Among those suggestions was a centralized state registration roll to replace those individually maintained by the counties. Budget constraints prevented Maryland from acting on this ambitious plan until Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002.  [Read more…] about Be careful what you wish for: MD’s centralized voter registration too efficient?

All Bark, No Bite: How California’s Top-Two Primary System Reinforces the Status Quo

Election Law Society · April 8, 2013 ·

During the November 6 general election, the state of California saw the effects of one fascinating component of its electoral system:  its top-two open primary.

Over two years ago, California voters proposed and passed Proposition 14, a ballot initiative that drastically reformed the state’s primary system. Prior to Prop 14, California conducted closed primary elections, which meant a voter could only vote for candidates in his own political party. The candidate with the most votes from each “qualified” political party—the Democratic Party, Republican Party, American Independent Party, Americans Elect Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Peace & Freedom Party—advanced to the general election where he would face the candidates who advanced from the other parties. In a sense, the old system guaranteed that a third party or independent candidate could secure a spot on the November general election ballot. [Read more…] about All Bark, No Bite: How California’s Top-Two Primary System Reinforces the Status Quo

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 114
  • Go to page 115
  • Go to page 116
  • Go to page 117
  • Go to page 118
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 179
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Pages

  • About Us
  • Election Law Glossary
  • Staff History
  • Links
  • Archived Pages
    • Citizens United + The States
    • Virginia Redistricting Competition

Search

View Posts by State

Archives

Tags

2016 Election 2020 Election Absentee ballots absentee voting Ballot Access ballot initiative Campaign Finance Citizens United Colorado Disenfranchise disenfranchisement Early Voting Election 2016 Electronic Voting Felon Voting Rights First Amendment Gerrymandering in-depth article judicial elections mail-in voting National Voter Registration Act North Carolina photo ID primary election Redistricting Referendum Registration Secretary of State state of elections Supreme Court Texas Virginia Vote by mail Voter Fraud Voter ID Voter Identification voter registration Voter Turnout voting voting and COVID Voting Machines Voting Rights Voting Rights Act VRA William & Mary

Blogroll

  • Election Law Issues
  • William & Mary Law School
  • Williamsburg Redistricting – "The Flat Hat" article

Friends

  • W&M Election Law Program

Contact Information:

To contact us, send an email to
wmstateofelections@gmail.com

Current Editorial Staff

Brendan W. Clark ’24, Editor-in-Chief
Rachel Clyburn ’24, Editor-in-Chief

State of Elections

Copyright © 2025 · Monochrome Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok