http://electionlawblog.org/archives/004260.html
My ability to add comments has already paid off. In response to my
earlier post,
"Are We All Chuck Schumer now?", a reader used the comments feature to comment
on something very interesting in Ms. Mier's questionnaire to the
judiciary committee. Here is the comment and my response:
Comments: Are we all Chuck Schumer Now?
I am not sure whether you have read the Harriet Miers questionairre,
but she cites a "proportional representation requirement of the Equal
Protection Clause". I am wondering whether or not I am missing
something or some case law that establishes this proportional
representation requirement and whether her belief in such a
proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause
may have an effect on her voting rights jurisprudence, assuming she is
confirmed
RH replies: I had not seen that. Very interesting. You can
find the quote on page 49 of the questionnaire posted here.
Ms. Miers writes: "While I was an at-large member of the Dallas City
Council, I dealt with issues that involved constitutional questions.
For instance, when addressing a lawsuit under Section 2 of the Voting
Rights Act, the council had to be sure to comply with the proportional
representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause." I take this
as just a slip of the pen, or a confusion of the statutory standards
under section 2 with the constitutional standards for vote dilution.
Posted by Bertrall Ross at October 18, 2005 08:54 AM
Be sure to check out the comments section of the blog for other
interesting tidbits like this one.
--
Rick Hasen
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
(213)736-1466 - voice
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org