SS 3990: Selected
Topics in Constitutional Law: Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Peters, Fall 2008
Unit 1: Elections and Voting
Week 1: Introduction and Voting
Sept 2: Introduction to Course
Sept 4: Elections and Voting:
We start our discussion of Voting and Elections by looking at the newest proclamation by the Supreme Court on this issue: Crawford v. Indiana Elections Board (2008). To facilitate this discussion please read the Courts 1966 Opinion in Harper v. Virginia, 383 US 663 (1966), as it is mentioned often in Crawford. You will be emailed or given an edited version of Harper. In addition to reading Harper, for class tomorrow please review the Crawford syllabus (really a summary of the case put together by court personnel – not officially the holding of the case) and Justice Stevens’ majority opinion. We will discuss this opinion in more detail. It will help class discussion if you print out the majority opinion as it details the facts, issue and holding of the case. I will provide printed copies of the dissenting opinions for you to review and discuss in class. We will work on case briefing by briefing at least part of this case in class. Finally, for class attempt to find and print out an editorial written after Crawford disagreeing with the majority analysis upholding the Voter ID rule.
FYI – for some comparison sake look here (Natl. Conference
of State Legislatures - http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm
)for a state by state listing of ID requirements. Compare, for example
Optional: See Voter Registration by Students raises Clouds of Consequences, NYT Sept 7, 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/education/08students.html?ref=us
Week 2: Elections
and Voting
Tues Sept 9: Elections and Equal Protection:
For class today read text p. 738-754 and brief the key cases
for class discussion. We will discuss
the problem of federal and state controls over elections as seen in Bush v. Gore
(2000), and voting rights in
Resource for Elections and Voting Law:
Brennan Center for Justice and Election Law @ Moritz
Optional (but interesting) reading/video on Bush v. Gore,
Questions to consider for class discussion: As you know Bush v. Gore is one of the most controversial decisions in the history of the Court. Defenders argue it represents a triumph for the rule of law, critics argue it is a judicial coup d’etat. What are the arguments for both? Did Bush v. Gore present a legal issue or a political one? What benefits or Harms would have come from the House of Representatives Deciding the Election rather than the court? What harm or benefit flows from the courts decision to decide the election?
Due: Assn 1:
a) Brief of Crawford
v.
b) Summarize Michigan Requirements for ID and Voter Registration – in this case please focus on the first time voter – I don’t care what sources you use to find this material but please cite them.
Thurs Sept 11: Elections Cont
In class watch excerpt from “Recount”, discuss political ramifications. Start readings from text p. 755-56 (McConnel v. FEC)
Optional: The Electoral College – Doug Linder on Elections here (includes links to Framer’s debates on the Electoral college, history of Electoral College, link to Bush v. Gore,
Week 3:
Tues Sept 16: No class so you may attend guest speaker for Constitution Day, Wednesday Sept 17. Mary Bejian, Deputy Director Michigan ACLU on “Threats to the Constitution in 2008.” She focuses on student voting and her talk will be in Dow 641 at 7:00 pm. If you cannot come to this speaker and we will schedule an alternate activity.
Thurs Sept 18: Permissible
Regulation of Election Campaigns
For class read the text pages 755-764 and brief McConnell v. FEC (2003). Using the text website read and brief these recent cases on contribution limits Randall v. Sorrell (2006) (striking down contribution limits) and electioneering in FEC v. Wisc. Right to Life, (2007). It might be helpful to read the 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 US 1 (1976) but this is optional.
Discussion Questions: 1. Do campaign financing laws raise serious First
Amendment issues? 2. How strong is the government interest in preventing
very wealthy individuals or corporations from having undue influence over
election outcomes?
3. How strong is the government interest in preventing individuals or
corporations from effectively "buying access" to candidates that they
support financially?
4. How would the First Amendment apply to limitations on contributions to
political parties, as opposed to the candidates themselves? 5. In your view does FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life effectively over-rule the McConnel and McCain/Feingold or not, if so does it acknowledge that? 6. Try to find a news article or editorial on
this and bring to class. 7. As you read Justice Thomas dissent in McConnell, is that really a dissent from
Buckley v. Valeo? 8. Is his approach now
the law after FEC v. Wisc Right to Life?
Do you share his concern as expressed in the McConnel dissent for protecting
anonymous speech? If so, do you concerns extend to anonymous campaign contributions?
Optional Articles on Wisc. Right to Life, See Greenhouse, “Justices Raise Doubts on Campaign Finance Law, NYT 4/26/2007
Due: Assn 2 Brief FEC v. Wisconsin Right to life. What key provision of BCRA is overturned by Wisconsin Right to Life? In your view does FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life effectively over-rule McConnel or not? If so does the case acknowledge that?
Find a news article or editorial (other than what is linked above) on the continued viability of BCRA (McCain Feingold finance reform) after FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life and bring it to share in class.