Democracy
The Democracy Program seeks to change the ways in which citizens participate in their government by fixing the systems that discourage voting, hinder competition and promote the interests of the few over the rights of the many.The challenge is great. Built-in obstacles bedevil our democracy. A patchwork of federal, state, and local laws govern campaigns and elections, creating a labyrinth of administrative barriers to voting. And money spent to elect candidates increases with each election cycle. District boundaries, drawn by incumbents who often elevate their personal and partisan power over the interests of their diverse constituents stifles the possibility of meaningful competition between can dates.
Our program collaborates with grassroots groups, advocacy organizations and reform-minded government officials to eliminate these obstacles. We strive to ensure that public policy and institutions reflect the diverse voices and interests that make for a rich, energetic democracy. The Center will advance these goals using tools of research, policy analysis and publications, media outreach and public education, legislative counseling and advocacy and legal action.
Four goals animate our work towards comprehensive reform:
- A voting system in which every vote counts, all citizens are registered, eligibility rules are expansive and turnout increases dramatically. Our voting reform work aims towards universal voter registration.
- An electoral redistricting system that protects civil rights, promotes partisan balance, and preserves real communities.
- A campaign finance system that reduces the role of big money in elections by providing voluntary public financing at the national, state and local levels.
- Fair, impartial courts that protect equal justice, individual rights and the checks and balances essential to the rule of law and promotion of standards to hold judges accountable for unbiased, reasoned and transparent decision-making.
NAMUDNO v. Holder involves a constitutional challenge to the Voting Rights Act, perhaps the country’s single most successful piece of civil rights legislation.
Justice Brent Benjamin of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia refused to recuse himself from the appeal of a $50 million jury verdict in this case, even though the CEO of the lead defendant spent $3 million supporting his campaign. Did Benjamin’s failure to recuse violate the Due Process Clause?
The Brennan Center filed a brief amici curiae in Sampson v. Buescher defending Colorado’s reporting and registration requirements for ballot issue committees.
Caperton Sparks Debate About Money in Judicial Elections
Linda Greenhouse and Rick Hasen weigh in on James Sample’s post about Caperton and the role of big money in judicial elections. Originally posted on the Election Law Blog.
Texas Chief Justice Tom Phillips, Linda Greenhouse writes, “suggests that very little will come of Caperton in the end . . .” This argument mischaracterizes Phillips’ views, and undermines the significance of Caperton.
Voting Rights Act: The Legacy of the 15th Amendment
“The historic accomplishments of the Voting Rights Act are undeniable. “
--Chief Justice Roberts, NAMUDNO v. Holder
Illustrations by Risko
Stakes Increase in Citizens United Case
The Supreme Court was expected to issue a long-anticipated decision in Citizen United today, but instead will hear new oral arguments on the case in September 2009.The two questions the Court asked parties to address at the new oral argument are:
Supreme Court Affirms Voting Rights Act
Today, in a narrow, 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court avoided a constitutional challenge to a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, instead holding in NAMUDNO v. Holder that the small utility district in Austin, Texas that brought the challenge could seek to “bail out” of the Act’s pre-clearance requirements.
Detailed Reports Offer Guidelines for Permanent Voter Registration
Today, two new studies on voter registration for Americans who move show both the feasibility and need to modernize the voter registration system. Tens of millions of Americans move every year, and permanent registration throughout all states would dramatically increase voter participation by millions.
Brennan Center Testimony for the New York Senate Elections Committee
On June 3, 2009, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy provided testimony for the New York Senate Elections Committee on New York State’s campaign finance problems and some of the constitutional issues related to campaign finance regulations
Testimony of Renée Paradis Before the New York State Elections Committee
Testimony on Senate Bill 4317, which would change the deadline for enrolling in a political party before a primary election, before the New York Senate Elections Committee.
Erika Wood before the New York State Senate Elections Committee
Testimony on Senate Bill 1266, the Voting Rights Notification and Registration Act before the New York State Elections Committee.
Voter Suppression Incidents 2008
A list of voter suppression incidents from the 2008 election.
The Impact of FEC v. WRTL II on State Regulation
The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law repeatedly has been asked to explain what the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2652 (2007) (“WRTL II”), means for state regulation of electioneering communications.