Spelling Murkowski: The Next Act - A Reply to Fishkin and Levitt

9 Pages Posted: 2 Aug 2011  

Chad Flanders

Saint Louis University - School of Law

Date Written: August 2, 2011

Abstract

Both Joey Fishkin’s and Justin Levitt’s responses to my article, “How Do You Spell MURKOWSKI?” deal thoughtfully with the deeper questions raised by the Murkowski litigation. They both wonder, in various ways, what the right way to think about voter assistance should be. But they approach the issue from very different angles. Fishkin focuses on the state’s obligation to assist voters: to what extent, and in what ways, is the state obligated to help voters vote? Levitt approaches the question of voter assistance from nearly the opposite angle: what responsibilities do voters have in making sure that their vote counts, and when are they properly considered “at fault” when their vote is cast incorrectly? In my brief response, I want to raise a few questions of my own about Fishkin’s and Levitt’s analysis of the right to vote.

Suggested Citation

Flanders, Chad, Spelling Murkowski: The Next Act - A Reply to Fishkin and Levitt (August 2, 2011). Alaska Law Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, p. 50, 2011; Saint Louis U. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2011-19. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1903799

Chad Flanders (Contact Author)

Saint Louis University - School of Law ( email )

100 N. Tucker Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63101
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
24
Abstract Views
398