Election Law Litigation Remained at Double Its Pre-Bush v. Gore Rate

In two earlier articles, I showed how the rates of U.S. election litigation have more than doubled since the pre-2000 period. The data are described further in this National Law Journal article. My earlier articles tracked the data only through 2008. I have now, with the excellent assistance of the library staff at UCI Law, updated the figures for 2009 and 2010. The result: a very slight uptick in the number of cases, bringing the average post-2000 annual case figure from 237 to 239. (The pre-2000 figure is an average 94 cases per year.). You can find the updated data in Figure 3 in this updated version of my paper on the Supreme Court's shrinking election law docket.

"Debate Escalates in Florida Over Redistricting"

Politics 365 reports.
< p="">
<>

"The Public Choice Problem in Corporate Law: Corporate Social Responsibility After Citizens United"

David Yosifon has written this article, forthcoming in the North Carolina Law Review.

"Reforming the Electoral College: Federalism, Majoritarianism, and the Perils of Sub-Constitutional Change"

Norman Williams has posted this draft on SSRN (forthcoming Georgetown Law Journal). Here is the abstract:

Frustrated by their inability to secure passage of a federal constitutional amendment abolishing the Electoral College, its opponents have sought to establish the direct, popular election of the President by having individual states agree to appoint their presidential electors in accordance with the nationwide popular vote. Ostensibly designed to prevent elections, such as the one in 2000, in which the Electoral College "misfired" and chose the candidate who received fewer popular votes, the National Popular Vote Compact has been adopted by several states. In this article, I argue that National Popular Vote Compact is an unnecessary and dangerous reform. It is unnecessary because the Electoral College is only modestly malapportioned and less so than many other accepted features of the U.S. political process, which distort popular political preferences to a greater extent. Moreover, that malapportionment is simply the consequence of having a presidential election system that combines elements of majoritarianism and federalism, as other industrialized democracies have adopted. It is dangerous because the NPVC contains a host of defects that would make electoral misfires more likely and trigger a series of political and constitutional crises. The abolition or reform of the presidential election system requires a federal constitutional amendment; attempting to achieve some reform via a sub-constitutional agreement among several states risks creating a presidential election system that is neither workable nor fair.

Another Must Read Mike McIntire Money and Politics Investigative Report in the NY Times

Do not miss Odd Alliance: Business Lobby and Tea Party.

Trevor Potter Advises Stephen Colbert on Forming a PAC

Hilarious!

"Without the Campaign Donors, This Wouldn’t Be Possible"

The NY Times offers this editorial.

A Good (But Anonymous and Thankless) Project for a New Election Law Professor or Eager Graduate Student

Someone should update and expand the sparse Election Law page at Wikipedia.

"Maxed Out in Michigan"

"The Fix" on Michigan redistricting.

"Bush v Gore, 10 Years Later: Election Administration in the United States"

The UC Irvine Center for the Study of Democracy has organized this great event for April 16-17. The link will also take you to the agenda. I'll be a discussant on one of the panels.

"Money for Moochers"

Jacob Sullum has written this McComish-related post at Reason.