Undue Deference to States in the 2020 Election Litigation

Authors

Joshua A. Douglas, University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law

First Page

405

Abstract

This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of the numerous election law cases that the Supreme Court and the federal appellate courts decided in the lead up to the 2020 election. The picture is bleak. Instead of protecting the constitutional right to vote, the Supreme Court and lower federal appeals courts unduly deferred to state legislatures in how to run the election, with little concern for the difficulties voters faced during a pandemic. If the courts do not alter their jurisprudence, then the only solution may be robust federal legislation or a constitutional amendment that enshrines the right to vote in the U.S. Constitution and requires states to justify, with specificity, any infringements on that right.

This Article was originally published in the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal as Joshua A. Douglas, Undue Deference to States in the 2020 Election Litigation, 30 WM. & MARY BILL RTS. J. 59 (2021). Reprinted with permission on behalf of the Media Council of William & Mary for the author’s benefit and for the benefit of the author’s institutions. This Article was accepted for inclusion in the record of the AALS Conference on Rebuilding Democracy and the Rule of Law, and is being reprinted in this issue containing the conference papers.

Recommended Citation

Joshua A. Douglas, Undue Deference to States in the 2020 Election Litigation, 26 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 405 (2022).
Available at: https://lawcommons.lclark.edu/lclr/vol26/iss2/5