State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

Is there a Religious Exception for Voter Discrimination? New York’s Hasidic Community and Community Council Elections

· ·

Earlier this year, The New York Times published an article describing the requirements for voting for the leadership of the Crown Heights Jewish Community Council in Brooklyn. The requirements are the following:“Jewish and religiously observant residents of Crown Heights, married, previously married or at least 30 years old, male.” The article raises the question of constitutionality of the gender discrimination in this policy, which I would like to explore further in this blog post.

The Crown Heights Jewish Community Council is described as a “social service agency” and receives annually about $2 million in government grants. Their service to the community includes distribution of food stamps and housing subsidies. While the council includes the word “Jewish” in its name and requires that voters for its leadership are “Jewish and religiously observant,” it is not a religious organization. The council’s reasons for not allowing women to vote for its leadership have ranged from female modesty to “marital tranquility”, to claiming that the discrimination against women is in fact a “one couple/one vote” rule. This specific community council has changed its policy since the publication of the article, but this is just one Hasidic community in a state that boasts the largest population outside of Israel. Hasidic Jewish communities can be found throughout Brooklyn and the “Borsht Belt” in upstate New York. This issue may come up again as more Hasidic women challenge policies that leave them disenfranchised in their own communities. [Read more…] about Is there a Religious Exception for Voter Discrimination? New York’s Hasidic Community and Community Council Elections

Results, Recanvass, Recount

· ·

As Kentucky basketball heats up its season against Maryland and Duke on the road,  several campaigns are gearing up for recanvasses and possible recounts.  The 7th Representative District race between Tim Kline and the incumbent, John Arnold, is separated by only 5 votes of the 15,775 cast.  In the 3rd Senatorial District, the vote margin is 297 out of 36,617 cast for either Whitney Westerfield or Joey Pendleton, the incumbent.  Ted Edmonds, the current representative, also ran a narrow race in the 91st Representative District against Gary Herald who leads him by only 134 votes of the 12,530 cast.

It is not clear whether any of the candidates will request a recount, such a decision usually occurs after the completion of a recanvass.  At least two have filed for a recanvass, with Arnold’s race having the most potential for a recount.  There are a number of avenues that can lead to a recount, in Kentucky.  Either a candidate or an election official can trigger the recount process.  Each of these paths have different requirements.  The election-official initiated recount occurs if election officials report errors in administration to the county clerk.  The clerk then must file a petition with the Circuit Court, within 15 days, requesting a recount.  Election officials did not report any substantial election errors in any of the three races, making it unlikely the county clerk will file such a recount petition.  [Read more…] about Results, Recanvass, Recount

Hi, I’m IRV

· ·

by Danny Muchoki

The underlying assumption of elections is that they capture voters’ preferences. Voters go into a booth, push a button/punch a card/pop a chad and when they’re all counted up we know that the person who wins over 50% of the votes is the winner. It’s obvious, right?

Not necessarily. In 1992, Bill Clinton became President with 43 percent of the vote. In 1998, Jesse “The Body” Ventura became governor of Minnesota while winning about 37 percent of the vote. In 2010 (again in Minnesota) Mark Dayton became governor with 43.6 percent of the vote. The runner- up was behind by just .4 (point four) percentage points – 43.2 percent.

A plurality system is simple, but some argue it is fundamentally unfair to let a candidate win with a plurality, let alone a plurality that is far short of a bare majority. [Read more…] about Hi, I’m IRV

Nebraska’s Need for Electoral Reform

· ·

by Jordan Evans

Since the 1992 Presidential election, Nebraska has used the Congressional District Method (CDM) to distribute its electoral votes.  The 2012 Presidential election should be the last time it is used.  While the CDM seems ideal for adhering to the “one person, one vote” standard articulated in Reynolds v. Sims, it actually does greater harm than good.

The CDM can be much different from the winner-take-all approach.  It is different in that the candidate receiving the most votes statewide does not necessarily receive all of Nebraska’s electoral votes.  Instead, a candidate receives the same number of electoral votes as congressional districts he wins.  The statewide winner then receives two additional electoral votes, representing Nebraska’s two Senate seats. [Read more…] about Nebraska’s Need for Electoral Reform

The Battleground 2012: Can Colorado Keep a (Ballot) Secret? After Citizen Center v. Gessler, It’s Not Required To Do So

· ·

by Caitlin Cater

Barcodes are a ubiquitous feature of modern life. They appear on everything from retail products and advertisements to patient forms at the doctor’s office. But perhaps one place a person might not expect to find a barcode is on an election ballot—especially when that barcode can be used to link an individual ballot with the voter who cast it. The notion seems at odds with our venerated tradition of the “secret” ballot. Indeed, that is what the plaintiffs argued in Citizen Center v. Gessler, a recent case before the United States District Court in Colorado.

On February 13, Citizen Center, a nonpartisan group of Colorado voters, filed a complaint challenging the constitutionality of election policies and procedures in six Colorado counties. Specifically, Citizen Center alleged that the defendant counties’ election ballots each contain a unique identifying mark that allows a voted ballot to be traced to its specific voter. Citizen Center further alleged that use of these ballots unconstitutionally infringes upon citizens’ fundamental right to vote, as well as their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.   [Read more…] about The Battleground 2012: Can Colorado Keep a (Ballot) Secret? After Citizen Center v. Gessler, It’s Not Required To Do So