How To Decide A Very Close Election For Presidential Electors: Part 3

10/28/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

We conclude our examination of close presidential elections by taking a deep dive into Florida in 2000. Was the December 12, 2000 deadline really as firm as it seemed to the courts and some of the parties, or could the count have proceeded?

How To Decide A Very Close Election For Presidential Electors: Part 2

10/23/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Kennedy-Nixon election in 1960 in Hawaii went to a recount. How Hawaii dealt with it—with two sets of electors casting two sets of electoral votes—provides a model for how to handle very close elections.

How To Decide A Very Close Election For Presidential Electors: Part 1

10/21/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Could a partial result from the very first contested presidential election provide us a path to handling a close election in 2020? Probably not—but the lessons from 1796 are revealing. This is Part 1 in a multi-part series that will help understand how close elections for presidential elector have been decided, good or bad, and how they should be decided this year.

Versus Trump: Versus The Post Office

10/15/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie are joined by Matthew Seligman of Public Citizen to discuss several lawsuits—including one in which he is counsel, NAACP v. USPS—where plaintiffs have challenged the cuts by the postal service that may slow down election mail. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Two Things We Can Do Now, In Case A Candidate Dies

10/7/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

What would happen if a presidential candidate were to die close to an election?

Pennsylvania Legislators Invite Some Extra SCOTUS Chaos this Election season

9/29/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Pennsylvania's Senate leadership has filed an emergency application at the Supreme Court that misreads the Elections Clause and invites electoral chaos

Justin Levitt

Loyola Law School

Freeing Purcell from the Shadows

9/27/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Supreme Court will soon hear a flood of election-related cases, yet one if its most important doctrines for deciding these cases remains remarkably opaque. So I will try to unpack and explain it.

Nicholas Stephanopoulos

Harvard Law School

Versus Trump: Blurring Public and Private Conduct

9/17/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week’s Versus Trump, Jason and Charlie discuss two new legal filings by the Trump DOJ that blur the line between the President as government official and the President as private citizen. In the first case, the government argues that the President's twitter feed is not an official public forum, so he can block people with whom he disagrees. In the second, the government argues that the President's denials that he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll were made in his official capacity as President. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Abridging the Right to Vote in the Fifth Circuit

9/15/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Texas Democratic Party v. Abbott makes several missteps. In this post, I’ll flag three of them.

Travis Crum

Washington University in St. Louis

The Real Problem with Seila

8/24/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that tenure protection for the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional. The decision’s reasoning may be more important—and worrisome—than the holding itself.

Zachary Price

U.C. Hastings College of the Law

The Voting Rights Act Should be Amended to Apply to the Federal Government

8/20/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Especially in light of President Trump’s recent attacks on mail-in voting and the United States Postal Service, Section 2 should be revised to prohibit racial discrimination in voting by the federal government.

Travis Crum

Washington University in St. Louis

Roberts’ Rules: How the Chief Justice Could Rein in Police Abuse of Power 

8/19/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

A theme of Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinions this past term is that courts should not employ open-ended balancing tests to protect fundamental constitutional rights. Yet there is one area of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence that is rife with such amorphous balancing tests: policing. It is long past time for the Court to revisit this area of law.

Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania: The Misuse of Complicity

7/20/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Supreme Court majority's expanding concept of complicity is likely to result in judges acting inconsistently, accommodating sympathetic religious claimants and denying relief to those who are not

Ira C. Lupu

George Washington University Law School

Robert W. Tuttle

George Washington University Law School

Regrettably, President Trump Does Have the Power to Commute Roger Stone's Sentence

7/17/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

By Brian Kalt: In a recent piece in the Atlantic, Corey Brettschneider and Jeffrey Tulis contend that the Stone commutation is invalid. Regrettably, their legal argument is weak

Take Care

Who Decides the Future of the Equal Rights Amendment?

7/6/20  //  In-Depth Analysis

Congress should decide what happens to the Equal Rights Amendment, not the courts or the Executive Branch.

Take Care