A person has to be somewhat elderly to remember the
great anger that the US Supreme Court "one man, one
vote" decisions caused. US Senator Everett Dirksen,
minority leader, made it his number one priority to
get a constitutional amendment passed, overturning the
decisions, as they related to state legislative
districts, and county and city elections. My memory
tells me he had majority support in congress (but not
the needed two-thirds). Even in California, where I
live, the anger of people who live on farms and in
small rural communities was white-hot. They felt
their interests would now be ignored.
--- Jeffrey MA Hauser <jmh248@nyu.edu> wrote:
I'm out of date by about 5 years, but... don't most
critiques of 1P, 1V
reduce down to the fact that it is an incomplete
solution, rather than
problematic in and of itself?
I mean, it's hard to see how the rightness of the
rule as a matter of
textualism or functional interpretation as subject
to much dispute. I
get how there are other values relative to
districting, but which values
are both both more important and in necessary
conflict w/1P, 1V?> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:42:42
-0800
From: Rick Hasen <Rick.Hasen@lls.edu>
Subject: Electionlawblog news and commentary
11/16/05
To: election-law <election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
---------------------------------
The NYT Editorial Page on Judge Alito and OnePerson,
One Vote
In Ignorethe Man Behind the Memo, the New York Times
editorial pagewrites: "[Judge Alito] noted his
'disagreement with Warren Courtdecisions' in many
important areas, including reapportionment.
Thereapportionment cases established the
one-person-one-vote doctrine,which requires that
Congressional and legislative districts includeroughly
equal numbers of people. They played a key role in
makingAmerican democracy truly representative, and are
almost uniformlyrespected by lawyers and scholars."
I think this is somewhat of an overstatement. While I
believe thereis near consensus that Baker v. Carr was
correctly decided,there has been a great deal of
criticism of the one person, one voterule in recent
years from both the left and right. I have
alreadywritten about Judge McConnell's criticisms. But
there have also beenthoughtul pieces by Sandy
Levinson, Grant Hayden, Richard Briffault,myself and
others who can't be characterized as
conservatives,questioning at least in part the
implementation of the Supreme Court'sone person, one
vote rule.
"Voter Disenfranchisement by Attrition; With
friendslike FEMA, who needs Jim Crow?"
In These Times offers this veryimportant report, which
begins: "When Hurricane Katrina came ashorein New
Orleans, it destroyed half the city’s voting
precincts andscattered 300,000 of the city’s
residents, most of them black, acrossthe country. With
citywide elections still scheduled in February
andMarch for 20 key public offices—including
mayor, criminal sheriff,civil sheriff and all city
council members—restoring the
city’sdemocratic capability might seem an
urgent task to some, but not to theFederal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA)."
Court Invalidates Ballot Measure Where
ChineseTranslation of Measure was Faulty
See here.
"Recounting Ohio: Was Ohio stolen? You might not
likethe answer"
Mother Jones has published thisvery interesting book
review by Mark Hertsgaard. Thanks to MattKohn for the
pointer.
Links to More WRtL Amicus Briefs
See here.One of the briefs, on behalf of Senator
McConnell, was authored by TedOlson.
More Commentaries on Lessons from the California
andOhio Election Reform Defeats
See NedFoley's commentary and BobBauer's commentary,
which offers a different view of the BCcitizens'
assembly promoted by Heather Gerken.
Conservative Groups' Amicus Brief in WRtL
Allison Hayward has posted it here.Allison reportsthat
the brief was filed on behalf of the Center for
CompetitivePolitics, the Cato Institute, the Institute
for Justice, Reason, theGoldwater Institute, and the
Claremont Institute. Who is CCP? "TheCenter for
Competitive Politics is a non-profit organization
founded inAugust 2005 by [former FEC Commissioner and
current Capital lawprofessor Brad] Smith and Stephen
M. Hoersting, a campaign financeattorney and former
General Counsel to the National RepublicanSenatorial
Committee. CCP’s mission, through legal
briefs, studies,historical and constitutional
analyses, and media communication, is toeducate the
public on the actual effects of money in politics, and
theresults of a more free and competitive electoral
process. With theexception of participating in the two
pending Supreme Court casesrelevant to its mission,
CCP will open its doors in early 2006."
Some Evidence One Person, One Vote Will Get Some
Playin Judge Alito Hearings
See thisfact sheet from the Alliance for Justice. A
snippet: "Judge Alitoshould say whether he continues
to believe that the Constitutionprovides no right to
abortion, contains no 'one person-one vote'principle,
permits religious prayer in school and forbids
affirmativeaction."
--Rick HasenWilliam H. Hannon Distinguished Professor
of LawLoyola Law School919 Albany StreetLos Angeles,
CA 90015-1211(213)736-1466 - voice(213)380-3769 -
faxrick.hasen@lls.eduhttp://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.htmlhttp://electionlawblog.org
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs