Is the Party Over? Examining the Constitutionality of Proposition 14 as It Relates to Ballot Access for Minor Parties
Jessica A. Levinson
Abstract
Open-access reader
Jessica A. Levinson
Abstract
Open-access reader
The U.S. Supreme Court must reexamine its deeply flawed ballot access jurisprudence. California voters passed Proposition 14 on June 8, 2010. This law reduces ballot access for minor parties. This Article argues that the Court has historically overestimated the government interests at stake in restricting ballot access, while derogating the important role that minor parties can play in elections. This must stop. This Article further argues that the Court should apply strict scrutiny to ballot access restrictions and use a holistic approach when examining such restrictions.
OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The U.S. Supreme Court must reexamine its deeply flawed ballot access jurisprudence. California voters passed Proposition 14 on June 8, 2010. This law reduces ballot access for minor parties. This Article argues that the Court has historically overestimated the government interests at stake in restricting ballot access, while derogating the important role that minor parties can play in elections. This must stop. This Article further argues that the Court should apply strict scrutiny to ballot access restrictions and use a holistic approach when examining such restrictions.
Key concepts: Ballot, Supreme court, Proposition, Constitutionality, Political science, Preference, Minor (academic), Law