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

60 Stan. L. Rev. 1 (2007-2008)
The Untimely Death of Bush v. Gore

handle is hein.journals/stflr60 and id is 9 raw text is: ARTICLES THE UNTIMELY DEATH OF BUSH V. GORE Richard L. Hasen* IN T RO D U CT IO N ..........................................................................................................2 I. BUSH V. GORE'S FAILURE TO IGNITE ELECTION ADMINISTRATION REFORM THROUGH LITIGATION..........................................................................................6 II. THE RISE OF PARTISAN ELECTION ADMINISTRATION LAWS AND THE TROUBLING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE GAP...............................................................15 III. MISLEARNING THE LESSONS OF BUSH V. GORE: THE SUPREME COURT'S POOR RESPONSE IN PURCELL V. GONZALEZ TO THE RISE OF ELECTION LAW AS A POLITICAL STRATEGY .................................................................................28 A. The Decision to Quickly Issue an Opinion in the Case .................................33 B. The Court's Endorsement of a Wholly Unsupported Empirical Claim that Threatens Equal Protection Rights in Election Administration Cases ............................................................................................................35 C. The Court's Unnecessarily Broad Discouragement of Pre-Election L itig a tio n ......................................................................................................3 7 D. The Ramifications .........................................................................................38 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................43 * William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles. Thanks to Bob Bauer, Adam Cox, Chris Elmendorf, Alec Ewald, Ned Foley, Chad Flanders, Heather Gerken, Sam Issacharoff, Justin Levitt, Dan Lowenstein, Luke McLoughlin, Lori Minnite, Rick Pildes, Michael Solimine, Roy Schotland, Dan Tokaji, and Tova Wang for useful comments and suggestions. Shortly before this Article went to press, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the consolidated Indiana voter identification appeals described in detail in Part IlI.D. Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., No. 07-21, 2007 WL 1999941 (Sept. 25, 2007); Indiana Dem. Party v. Rokita, No. 07-25, 2007 WL 1999963 (Sept. 25, 2007). A few days before the announcement I published an op-ed in the Washington Post setting forth why I thought the Court should hear the case. See Richard L. Hasen, A Voting Test for the High Court, WASH. POST, Sept. 19, 2007, at A23, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2007/09/18/AR2007091801572.html. The Court will hear the argument in early 2008 and likely issue an opinion before the 2008 presidential election. The Court will have a chance to reconsider its position in the Purcell case and perhaps avoid the partisan divide that has plagued the courts and other institutions since Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000). 1

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