-
8/9/2019 Election Law One-Page Outline
1/3
1. The Right to Votea. Harper v. VA St. Board of
Elections (1966)
A. 24A banned poll taxes in 1964B. Held: Voting cannot be
condit. on wealth or paying ee.
1. !o connection to tr"e #oting $"ali%cation&. 'issent
wanted legis. not cts. to strie this down
b. Skafte v. Rorex (19*6)A. Held: !on+citi,ens do not
ha#e right to #ote
c. Kramer v. Union Free School District o. !" (1969)A. -n !
school board election only those with property co"ld #ote.B. - law
gi#es #ote to so/e and not others then the co"rts /"st
scr"tini,e.&. Held: -n this case not tailored eno"gh or
scr"tiny o 0co/pelling state
interest.
2. Redistrictinga. erry/andering
A. Bacgro"nd
1. 3hoot or proportionality.2. oo at 5 people #s. 5 o #oters and
changes in pop. o#erti/e. &an get sa/e res"lts w7o
gerry/andering.
B. Davis v. Bandemer (2884)1. Held: l"rality on
/erits o"nd -! plan constit"tional2. !ot de facto in#alid i
partly political. 'ont want e#ery /ap
challenged.&. Vieth v. #$%elirer (2884)
1. &an a &o"rt try a case on the gro"nd o
gerry/andering;2. Held: !o. !o pro#ision "nder &onstit. or
stat"te or policing airness.
'. &U&A' v. (err) (2886)1. Held: 'istrict /aps changed
in /id+decade pres"/ed in#alidly
political.
3. Minority Vote Dilutiona. Voting
A. - co#ered by =4(a) ha#e to get preclear. thr" '&
&irc.B. ?r can s"b/it to A "p to 68 days prior to election. A
has to deny or
goes thr".b. Shel%) 'o$nt) v. Holder (281)
A. 'id renewing => and 4(b) #iol. constr. o 14A and thereore
18A and Art. 4o @3&on;
B. Held: es =4 "nconstit. B"rden no longer necess. b7c ti/es
changedro/ >8 yrs ago.
&. &ongress co"ld go bac and %x =4 and thereby =>c.
Beyond the . Voting changes did concern a #oting $"al.
pre+re$. standard
practice or proced. w7 respect to #oting.
4. Election Adinistrationa. &o"nting Votes and D$"al
rotection
A. B$sh v. *ore (2888)1. Eollowing the @3 3&s decision
in B$sh v. (alm Beach 'o$nt)
'anvassin+ Board and conc"rrent with V oreFs contest o
thecerti..o Es resid. election res"lts on 12772888 the E 3&
orderedthe &irc. &o"rt in eon &ty. tab"late by hand
9888 contested ballotsro/ ia/i+'ade &ty.
2. Also ordered e#ery co"nty in E /"st i//ediately begin
/an"alreco"nting all G"nder+#otesG (ballots which did not indicate
a #ote orpresident) b7c there were eno"gh contested ballots to
place theo"tco/e o the election in do"bt.
. B"sh and &heney %led a re$"est or re#iew ro/ @3 3& and
so"ght ane/ergency petition or a stay o the E 3&Fs
decision.
4. Hhe @3 3& granted re#. I iss"ed stay on 1279. Jeard oral
args. on12711.
>. Held: -n the circ"/stances o this case any /an"al reco"nt
o #otesseeing to /eet the 12712 0sae harbor deadline "nconst. "nder
theD& o the 14A.
b. Voting HechnologyA. ,exler v. Anderson (2886)
1. Held: Es /an"al co"nt sche/e or to"ch+screen #ote /achines
was&onstit"tional
c. Voter -denti%cationA. 'ra-ford v. arion 't). Elec. Bd.
(288)
1. Voter -' law said -' re$. i #oting at oKce o circ. cler in
person priorto Dlec. 'ay
2. 'id not apply to absentee or state licensed acilities lie
n"rsingho/es.
. - religio"s obCection or indigent can cast pro#isional
ballot
4. !o -' re$"ired or registration.>. Eree -' to $"ali%ed
#oters to establish residence6. Rule ++ Any photo -' is a
/ini/"/ b"rden that does not #iol. the "nd.
right to #ote.a. - /ore than /ini/"/ b"rden then strict
scr"tiny.b. Hhis is the 0two+trac approach o L. Mhite.
d. Dlecetion itigation is on the
-
8/9/2019 Election Law One-Page Outline
2/3
4. D#en constit. anti+alsehood laws are probably still
ineTecti#e sincehard to enorce
c. L"dicial DlectionsA. -nherently proble/atic b7c o
conUict+o+interestB. L"dicial &andid. 3peech and &ond"ct
&odes
1. Rep$%. (art) of inn. v. ,hite (2882)a. GAnno"nce
cla"sesG o C"dicial ethics codes which prohibit C"dicial
candidates ro/ anno"ncing their #iews on how disp"ted legal
orpolitical iss"es be decided are "nconstit"tional.
&. L"dicial Dlec. and the &a/p. oney: i/its or 8
"nreported
e. Held: !ot extortion. Jad to show 8$id pro 8$og. Mas woring in
"rtherance o legiti/ate interests o constit"ents
. US v. S$n9Diamond *ro-ers of 'A (1999)a. &A act said
yo" co"ldnt gi#e anything to past pres. or "t"re
candid. in ret"rn or act done or to be doneb. a#e to Agric. 3ec.
while he was in charge o two /atters that
aTected the/c. 'id not show ca"sal lin b7t gi#ing and the two
/atters in ront o
hi/d. Held: Ho s"stain con#iction or ederal bribery there /"st
be a clear
$"id pro $"o lin between the grat"ity recei#ed and peror/ance
o a speci%c act
D. ?Kcial Act1. State v. Bo-lin+ (Ari,. App. 196*)
a. &harged w7 recei#ing bribe while in AX legislat"re or g"y
to getli$"or license
b. 3"perintendent o i$"or had carte blanche discretion in
selectingrecipients
c. !o nor/al obligation or legislator to go beore the
3"perintendentd. Held: Mitho"t an oKcial obligation there is no
oKcial act and no
bribery.
1+. The Buckley ,rae-or a. 3o/e 8+1
depending on oKce and the si,e o the constit"ency.2. Hhe state
clai/s that its interest is in pre#enting corr"ption.. Held: Hhis
li/it is #alid "nder B$ckle)
B. Randall v. Sorrell (2886)
1. &annot li/itexpendit"res by
a candid. d"ringan election cycle
2. &annot li/itpers. contrib. aslow as 288+488
. Both against 1AEree 3peech
b. &a/paign&ontrib"tions andolitical artiesA. '0 Rep.
Fed.
'amp. 'omm. v.FE' (1996)
1. Held: Hhe ed.ca/p.+%nancingli/its on a/o"nparties /ayspend on
&ong.races asestablished byED&A #iolate 1Arights when
applied to expend. a party /ade independently o any
candidateFsca/paign.
c. Hhe D/ergence o 3"per A&s and ?ther ?"tside ro"psA.
Speechno-.or+ v. FE' (2818)
1. Allowed or 3"per A&s as co/panion to 'iti5ens United2.
ro"ps can accept "nli/ited "nds or -Ds. Jowe#er they still ha#e to
register as pol. org. lie other A&s
13. #ublic ,inancinga. Dxisting "blic Einancing 3yste/s
A. -n 3tates1. Eo"r
-
8/9/2019 Election Law One-Page Outline
3/3
A. A< Free Enterp. 'l$%2s Freedom (A' v.
Bennett (2818)1. 3& said /atching "nds were
coerci#e2. !o legit. state interest. 1A does not howe#er bar all
p"blic %nancing
c. roposals or E"rther 8+*> to indi#id"al /aCor party
candidates and "p personal contrib"tions ro/ 1 to >.1.
Jowe#er ignores third parties2. Hhis is ind o a #o"cher plan
14. (apaign ,inance Disclosurea. B$ckle) v. Valeo (19*6) N
3ee Abo#eb. c/nt)re v. 0H Elections 'ommission (196>)
A. Anony/o"s political speech still protectedB. -n B$ckle) v.
A'&F held "nconstit. to re$"ire paid petition circ. to
wear -'
badgec. Doe v. Reed (2818)
A. ay rights gro"p did not want to disclose indi#id"als na/es
who signedreerend"/ petition in a#or or gay rights.
B. !ot strict scr"tiny&. 'isclos"re
