Cover

Contents

pdf iconDownload PDF

p. vii

read more

Preface

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. ix-x

The idea for this book arose out of two events. First, Bill Marshall, who was working in the White House but planning a return to academia, called and asked if I would participate in a conference commemorating the fortieth anniversary of Baker v. Carr, the Supreme Court case opening the door to a variety of challenges to election laws in the United...

read more

Acknowledgments

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. xi-xii

This book is much stronger thanks to the insightful and challenging comments of many colleagues. Bruce Cain, Beth Garrett, Heather Gerken, Tom Mann, Chris May, Rick Pildes, Bob Pushaw, Roy Schotland, and Mark Tushnet had the patience to read and comment on the entire manuscript. I also received useful comments and suggestions from Ellen ...

read more

Introduction

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 1-13

Supreme Court intervention in the political process has become a regular feature of the American political landscape. To give a few examples, the Court has required the reapportionment of virtually every legislative body in the country to comply with the principle of “one person, one vote”; ended the practice of political patronage employment; prevented ...

read more

1. The Supreme Court of Political Equality

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 14-46

In the 1970s, African-American voters made up about one-third of the Mobile, Alabama, electorate. Whites and blacks tended to prefer different candidates for each of the three city commissioners, a phenomenon voting experts have come to call “racially polarized voting.”1 Mobile conducted its elections for the city commission using an “at large” system, meaning everyone in the city voted for each commissioner. ...

read more

2. Judicial Unmanageability and Political Equality

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 47-72

The conventional story about the Supreme Court’s decision in Baker v. Carr2 to adjudicate disputes over legislative apportionment is that political market failure required judicial intervention. The market failed in the case of unequally populated districts because existing legislators could not be expected to vote themselves out of a job; nor would voters who ...

read more

3. Protecting the Core of Political Equality

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 73-100

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections1 and Lubin v. Panish,2 decided just eight years apart from one another, on the surface appear to be similar cases. Harper is the poll tax case described in detail in the previous chapter. In Lubin, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Bullock v. Carter3 (a decision itself relying on Harper), the Court struck down on ...

read more

4. Deferring to Political Branches on Contested Equality Claims

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 101-137

Voters in Missouri pass a law limiting individual campaign contributions to state officials to amounts as low as $100.1 Congress decides to suspend state-imposed literacy tests for voting in state and local elections six years after the Supreme Court holds that such tests, if fairly administered, do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.2 ...

read more

5. Equality, Not Structure

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 138-156

The changes I have advocated in the three preceding chapters recognize that courts (and the law professors providing them with unsolicited advice!) do not have particular expertise in the design of political systems or government entities across the United States. But courts remain the government actors of last resort who must referee some high-stakes ...

read more

Conclusion

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 157-165

Back in March 1965, Justice Black got burned. Seeing six votes to affirm a lower court ruling upholding the power of the states to impose a poll tax in state elections (absent congressional legislation or constitutional amendment), the justice probably concluded quite reasonably that there was little risk in calling for a full hearing in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections. ...

Appendix 1

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 166-175

Appendix 2

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 176-188

Notes

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 189-220

Index

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 221-225

read more

About the Author

pdf iconDownload PDF

p. 227

Richard L. Hasen is Professor of Law and William M. Rains Fellow at Loyola Law School, Los Angeles. He is coauthor of a textbook, Election Law: Cases and Materials, and co-edits Election Law Journal. He ...