[EL] Arizona
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Jun 17 10:46:46 PDT 2013
"The Supreme Court Gives States New Weapons in the Voting Wars"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51695>
Posted on June 17, 2013 10:45 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51695>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
/The Daily Beast/
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/17/the-supreme-court-gives-states-new-weapons-in-the-voting-wars.html>
has posted my analysis of today's Supreme Court opinion in the Arizona
case. It begins
Supreme Court watchers have been waiting each day to see if the
Supreme Court is going to strike down a key provision of the Voting
Rights Act in a case called /Shelby County v. Holder/. The Court did
not issue that opinion Monday, but it did issue another important
ruling in an Arizona voting case that could lead to new struggles
between states and the federal government---and between Democrats
and Republicans---over the rules for running our federal elections.
While the opinion is a short-term victory for the federal
government, it raises more questions than answers and ultimately
could shift some power in elections back to the states.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D51695&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Supreme%20Court%20Gives%20States%20New%20Weapons%20in%20the%20Voting%20Wars%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Elections Clause <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=70>, Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off
Bush v. Gore Cited for First Time by a Supreme Court Justice Since
Case Decided in 2000 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51692>
Posted on June 17, 2013 10:04 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51692>
by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Josh Blackman notes
<http://joshblackman.com/blog/2013/06/17/justice-thomas-cites-the-bush-v-gore-unprecedent-in-arizona-dissent/>
this line in a footnote in Justice Thomas's dissent: "This Court has
recognized, however, that "the state legislature's power to select the
manner for appointing [presidential] electors is plenary; it may, if it
chooses, select the electors itself." Bush v. Gore, 531 U. S. 98, 104
(2000) (per curiam) (citing U. S. Const., Art. II, §1, and McPherson v.
Blacker, 146 U. S. 1, 35 (1892)."
Josh:
I have previously called Bush v. Gore an "unprecedent
<http://joshblackman.com/blog/2013/04/04/the-unprecedent/>." Because
the Court made it clear that this case should not be cited to govern
any other case.
Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the
problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents
many complexities.
A quick Westlaw search reveals that this is the *first* time any
Justice has actually cited Bush v. Gore. A law review article by
Rick Hasen with "Bush v. Gore" in the title is cited in Citizens United.
Notably, no one else joined Justice Thomas's dissent.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D51692&title=Bush%20v.%20Gore%20Cited%20for%20First%20Time%20by%20a%20Supreme%20Court%20Justice%20Since%20Case%20Decided%20in%202000&description=>
Posted in Bush v. Gore reflections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=5>,
Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> | Comments Off
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130617/ffbaa633/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130617/ffbaa633/attachment.png>
View list directory