State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

The Battleground 2012: Who Gets to Vote When? Ohio Election Rules Have a Smaller Effect at the Local Level

· ·

by Elizabeth Herron

In a swing state like Ohio, who gets to vote and when is critical. This is evidenced by the recent controversy in the state about early voting restrictions. The disagreement has two main issues – special accommodations for members of the military, and the elimination of early voting three days before Election Day. These two issues are connected, as members of the military and civilians overseas would technically have been allowed to vote during the three day period United States-based Ohioans would be barred from early voting.

Proponents of the early voting restrictions claim that they are necessary in order to provide election officials time to update voting records and prevent voter fraud.  Opponents argue that they are arbitrary and disproportionately affect low-income and minority voters. This issue caught national media attention when the Obama and Romney campaigns took oppositional positions on the matter. An Ohio District Court judge found the restrictions a violation of the equal protection clause. Ohio Attorney General Mike Dewine quickly announced his decision to appeal the matter to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the lower court. The Supreme Court declined to block early voting. This issue has ended for now, though others press on. [Read more…] about The Battleground 2012: Who Gets to Vote When? Ohio Election Rules Have a Smaller Effect at the Local Level

The Battleground 2012: Uncapped in Missouri: Missouri’s “Lax” Campaign Finance Laws Generate Concerns of Fraud and Corruption

· ·

As the November Congressional and Presidential elections are just around the corner, Missouri, a key swing state, has come under the microscope for the state’s campaign finance laws, or lack thereof.  In 2010, Missouri passed Senate Bill 844 to establish campaign finance restrictions on donations in state and congressional races.  The law required that an officeholder/candidate report contributions over $500 within 48 hours of receipt and restricted campaign finance committees from contributing money to another committee.  However, the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the law in February of this year, holding the statute violated a section of the state’s constitution “prohibiting legislators from amending a bill to change its original purpose.”  Senate Bill 844 was initially proposed to address administrative contracting issues in statewide elections, but several amendments were added to address looming campaign finance concerns.  This decision has left Missouri campaign donations relatively unchecked and the State’s campaign ethics laws “the most lax in the country.” [Read more…] about The Battleground 2012: Uncapped in Missouri: Missouri’s “Lax” Campaign Finance Laws Generate Concerns of Fraud and Corruption

The Battleground 2012: Introduction

· ·

by Jacob Derr & Tony Glosson

During the next two days we’ll be posting a special series of entries under the banner “The Battleground 2012.”

Over the past decade, every major presidential campaign and many state campaigns have litigated state election law as a part of their races. Candidates spend money, time, and human capital fighting in courtrooms in states across the nation, especially if the vote looks close. This is not merely a luxury, but an election strategy itself.

We’ll be taking a look at some of the fights going on in several states considered “battlegrounds” this election cycle, where either the presidential race is close or there is a state race that is strategic to the national party. We will examine a campaign finance free-for-all in Missouri, attempts to shoehorn third party candidates onto the ballot in Oklahoma, and the aftermath and continued importance of the legal wrangling in Ohio this fall.

We hope you will enjoy this series, which aims to take us inside battles that, in an election cycle as contentious as this one, will continue in the courtroom long after election day.

Jacob Derr & Tony Glosson are the editors of the State of Elections blog. [Read more…] about The Battleground 2012: Introduction

It Takes Two: Washington State’s Primary System Divides Scholars, Unites Parties

· ·

by Devin Braun

As states like Arizona contemplate changes to their electoral primary systems, it’s important to give an update of how Washington State, one of the nation’s premier laboratories of the Top Two primary, along with Louisiana and California, has fared politically and legally since its overhaul in 2004. Washington’s system emerged from the wreckage of the Supreme Court’s rejection of blanket primaries in the 2000 case California Democratic Party v. Jones. In Washington, all eligible candidates list their party of preference, including but not limited to classics like the Employment and Wealth Party, and the top two vote-getters regardless of party advance to the general election. The logic behind such a model is that by opening up the primary to more candidates at one time, the likelihood will be greater of having to get the necessary support from closer to the political center. This would, in turn, produce more moderate politicians, activate greater interest among politically independent voters, and cut back against the corrosive influence of party machines. [Read more…] about It Takes Two: Washington State’s Primary System Divides Scholars, Unites Parties

Mail-In Ballot Fraud: Harvesting Votes in the Shadow of Texas’ Voter ID Controversy

· ·

by Andrew Lindsey

Almost every American realizes that democracies are only as legitimate as their rules for counting the votes. Voter fraud is an unfortunate reality in this country that undermines citizens’ faith in the electoral franchise, but few agree on its pervasiveness. Recently, a number of states have moved to enact stricter voting laws based on a concern that voter fraud is a considerably underrated threat to our electoral system. Opponents of these laws maintain that lawmakers are engaging in partisan exaggeration to disenfranchise minority constituents, and numerous lawsuits have already been filed in both state and federal court. Texas is a salient example, and many predict that the recent ruling against its voter identification (ID) law will make its way to the Supreme Court in the near future. [Read more…] about Mail-In Ballot Fraud: Harvesting Votes in the Shadow of Texas’ Voter ID Controversy