If Section 2 compliance isn't a compelling state interest, how would it survive Boerne? Alabama has a jurisdictional statement in Milligan, and they'd argue it isn't congruent/proportional. I don't see much daylight here.
That said, I could see an argument that it could still survive Katzenbach.
October 17, 2025 at 12:48 AM
If Section 2 compliance isn't a compelling state interest, how would it survive Boerne? Alabama has a jurisdictional statement in Milligan, and they'd argue it isn't congruent/proportional. I don't see much daylight here.
That said, I could see an argument that it could still survive Katzenbach.
The second post argues that the Court's attempt to impose sunset dates on congressional statutes is deeply ahistorical and indefensible on originalist grounds:
The second post argues that the Court's attempt to impose sunset dates on congressional statutes is deeply ahistorical and indefensible on originalist grounds:
The first post addresses the limits and importance of Section 2 of the VRA. Those who are not familiar with this area of law may find this real-world example particularly illuminating:
The first post addresses the limits and importance of Section 2 of the VRA. Those who are not familiar with this area of law may find this real-world example particularly illuminating:
I discuss it in The Unabridged Fifteenth Amendment and The Riddle of Race-Based Redistricting. The former paper excavates the original understanding of the right to hold office free of racial discrimination under 15A; the latter mentions it briefly at the end in relation to Section 2 of the VRA.
May 19, 2025 at 12:53 AM
I discuss it in The Unabridged Fifteenth Amendment and The Riddle of Race-Based Redistricting. The former paper excavates the original understanding of the right to hold office free of racial discrimination under 15A; the latter mentions it briefly at the end in relation to Section 2 of the VRA.