About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

69 UCLA L. Rev. 1028 (2022-2023)
Questioning Questions in the Law of Democracy: What the Debate over Voter ID Laws' Effects Teaches about Asking the Right Questions

handle is hein.journals/uclalr69 and id is 1062 raw text is: Questioning Questions in the Law of Democracy: What the Debate Over Voter ID Laws' Effects Teaches About Asking the Right Questions Emily Rong Zhang ABSTRACT Voter identification laws (voter ID laws), laws that require voters to present identification when voting, launched the modern Voting Wars. After the Supreme Court blessed Indiana's voter ID law in Crawford v. Marion County, voter ID laws proliferated across the country. Their prevalence belies their notoriety. They remain one of the most hotly contested category of election laws and are often referred to as a voter suppression law, if not the modern voter suppression law. While these laws first served as a rallying cry for the election law, they have become a sore spot for what is historically a collaborative and close community of social scientists, lawyers, and legal scholars. Many social scientists have concluded that voter ID laws have had negligible effects, if any, on voter turnout. That conclusion may seem surprising-even difficult to believe-given how many eligible voters lack IDs. It has raised uncomfortable questions about whether the progressive legal alarm over voter ID laws-including litigation challenging those laws-has been warranted. By harmonizing the causal social science literature and descriptive evidence unearthed in the course of litigation, this Article is the first to offer an account of why empiricists have consistently failed to detect a turnout effect from voter ID laws. Upon investigation, what is surprising is not that a turnout effect has not been detected, but why an effect should have been expected in the first place. Evidence from litigation suggests that more than 99 percent of registered voters who habitually vote may have the requisite ID for voting, even though large numbers of eligible (but not registered) citizens lack IDs. It is therefore unsurprising that the best causal studies suggest that voter ID laws decreased turnout (that is, voting conditional on registration) by no more than 2 percent. Those studies should not have expected any other result: existing causal studies sought to detect an effect that descriptive evidence did not support. Thus, the discord in the literature results not from the sidelining of important causal findings, but rather from the lack of interaction between the causal academic literature and litigation-derived descriptive evidence. Resolution of the debate on the turnout effects of voter ID laws has far reaching implications for the election law community. For legal scholars in particular, doing so highlights important responsibilities in maintaining an interdisciplinary relationship with social scientists. The traditional notion of the interdisciplinary relationship between empiricists and lawyers in the field of election law is one of answering questions and questioning answers, in which social scientists 69 UCLA L. REV. 1028(2022)

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most