What to Expect When You’re Electing: Federal Courts and the Political Thicket in 2012

20 Pages Posted: 12 Mar 2012 Last revised: 24 Jul 2013

Date Written: March 12, 2012


In this brief Article, forthcoming in the Federal Bar Association's magazine, the Federal Lawyer, I aim to do three things. First I canvass the nature of election law disputes which are likely to come to federal courts in the 2012 election season, focusing on constitutional questions arising from the interaction of state and federal courts in this area. Second, I discuss timing strategies which federal courts can and should use to avoid conflicts with state courts and to avoid becoming further enmeshed in the political thicket. Third, and most controversially, I suggest that federal courts be aware in evaluating election law disputes of the potential for subconscious bias on the part of election administrators, state courts, and federal judges themselves. I use examples from two important election law cases: Roe v. Alabama and Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner. I conclude with steps federal courts can take to minimize the potential for subconscious judicial bias and threats to the legitimacy of both the judiciary and the electoral process.

Keywords: election law, Bush v. Gore, Roe v. Alabama, Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner, election litigation

Suggested Citation

Hasen, Richard L., What to Expect When You’re Electing: Federal Courts and the Political Thicket in 2012 (March 12, 2012). Federal Lawyer, June 2012, UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper No. 2012-14, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2020767 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2020767

Richard L. Hasen (Contact Author)

UCLA School of Law ( email )

3102063103 (Phone)
90095-1476 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics