Election Law Society

Weekly Wrap Up

Election Law Society · December 4, 2009 ·

Every Friday, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– Events in Virginia’s 21st district are moving quickly, and Virginia Beach Circuit Court Judge Fredrick Lowe has scheduled a recount for the 14th of December.

-Hawaii’s chief election officer, Kevin Cronin, has resigned abruptly, shortly after proposing a plan that would close 40% of that state’s polling places. The plan, Cronin says, is a necessary evil after budget cuts have severely hampered the state’s ability to fund its elections.

– A New Jersey judge has extended restrictions on GOP “ballot security” programs.

– A pro “instant runoff” group in Minnesota has been fined for violating that state’s election laws, as they falsely claimed that Barack Obama, John McCain, and others endorsed a Minnesota ballot measure to institute runoff voting in that state. Instant runoff voting is a form of voting in which voters rank the candidates by preference. Obama and McCain are active supporters of instant runoff voting, but they have not actively endorsed the Minnesota ballot measure, as was claimed in some of the group’s literature.*

Permalink: http://stateofelections.pages.wm.edu/2009/12/03/weekly-wrap-up-2/

*Editor’s note: This posting originally implied that Obama and McCain do not support instant runoff voting, when in fact they do. Stateofelections.com regrets the error.

snap this url

Discriminatory Disenfranchisement in Virginia

Election Law Society · December 4, 2009 ·

Of Felons and Taints

Almost all states place some restriction on the rights of felons to vote. Three states–Kentucky, Florida, and Virginia–maintain a system of permanent disenfranchisement for convicted felons. There’s a long historical tradition of voting restrictions against felons, dating to well before the Constitution was ratified. Section 2 of the 14th Amendment explicitly acknowledges the practice of criminal disenfranchisement (and, to a degree, endorses it by not penalizing states during Congressional reapportionment for denying the franchise to those guilty of “participation in rebellion, or other crime”).

Given this long usage and constitutional recognition, lawyers often find it hard to challenge disenfranchisement laws as violating voters’ rights. Yet as we all know, not every law that appears neutral is constitutional. Literacy tests and poll taxes are both facially neutral, but both have long been recognized as acting to deprive non-white voters of their fundamental rights.

Still, challenges to disenfranchisement regimes are rarely successful. For example, a 2005 challenge to Florida’s law, was decimated by the 11th Circuit sitting en banc in the case of Johnson v. Bush (405 F.3d 1214). There, the court heard an appeal to a summary judgment against a group of felons seeking the restoration of their rights. The plaintiffs argued that Florida had re-authorized its felon disenfranchisement law in 1868 for the purpose of discriminating against black voters, and as such the law should be held invalid as intentionally discriminatory.

Write In Candidates

Election Law Society · December 2, 2009 ·

While perusing a 2,360 Mb tome on New York’s State laws, I came across a topic that I had to discuss. Strangely enough the state most useful to my interest was on the news for another reason. The state of Alaska, home of Sarah Palin, is the state I choose to focus on.

Most high school students have experiences with write in candidates, the students who don’t run officially but end up running on that empty line. One of my fondest high school memories was when the senior class elected Chimp Pan Gee as their class president via write in. But has anyone ever won by being a write in candidate? While most elections have an empty line for write ins, can a write in actually win? Alaska provides us with the latest in what’s probably a short list of write-in successes. [Read more…] about Write In Candidates

Op Ed: In Response to Tennessee Voter Confidence Act

Election Law Society · December 2, 2009 ·

Our thanks to Drew Staniewski for this review of where we stand in Tennessee re: free, fair and verifiable elections.

Our group (Gathering To Save OUR Democracy) worked hard to pass the TVCA in time for it to be implemented in 2008, before the last election. There was enough time (and enough remaining HAVA money) to accomplish that. However, as a concession to some, TVCA implementation was delayed until 2010. When Republicans not only won control of our legislature for the first time in 140+ years but also won every open seat in our legislature, they announced that one of their three top legislative priorities was to repeal the TVCA.

It is quite instructive that Tennessee became the ONLY state in 2008 where Republicans won more seats in our legislature, despite Democrats outnumbering Republicans here by a 47-39% margin and despite Democratic voter registration efforts outpacing Republicans by better than 4-to-1 in the months leading up to the 2008 election. [Read more…] about Op Ed: In Response to Tennessee Voter Confidence Act

Partnership with Georgetown Law’s Election Law Society

Election Law Society · November 30, 2009 ·

As promised before break, we have a great announcement to make. Georgetown’s new Election Law Society is joining our efforts to cover the moving pieces in election law in all fifty states.

We knew from day one that our goal was ambitious, so we’re glad that the desire to discuss state election law is spreading to other law schools. Posts from Georgetown law are coming soon and we’d welcome other law schools who are interested in teaming up with us.

Welcome aboard, Georgetown!

Permalink: http://stateofelections.pages.wm.edu/2009/11/30/partnership-georgetown/

http://college-homework-help.org/