In both law and public scrutiny, renewed attention is being given to the simple act of casting a ballot. At a time when the formal act of voting has been relaxed, and more than a third of Americans cast their ballots in another manner than voting at the polls on Election Day, there is a decided pushback. In some sense this is hardly novel; question of ballot integrity and ballot access have been a recurring issue in the U.S. from Reconstruction to the Civil Rights Era. In both of these previous eras, enfranchisement and disenfranchisement had a partisan edge, but were understood to be battles over the black franchise – and properly so. Whether that remains the case is the subject of this Article, first presented as the Currie Lecture at Duke Law School.
The inquiry begins with the partisan implications of turnout and focuses primarily on the partisan dimension of new efforts at ballot restriction. The main thesis is that while issues of the franchise correlate with race, as does the partisan divide between Democrats and Republicans, the new battles over ballot access do not readily lend themselves to a narrative that focuses primarily on racial exclusion. Rather they point to a deep vulnerability of American democracy in entrusting election administration and election eligibility to local partisan control.
Date of Authorship for this Version
Issacharoff, Samuel, "Ballot Bedlam" (2014). New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers. Paper 491.