Expert Commentary

Go to Commentary Archives

Featured Commentary


The Supreme Court and the RIght to Vote

Daniel P. Tokaji - Posted on September 21, 2016, 1:00 pm

For over 130 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that the right to vote fundamental. The idea is that voting for candidates who represent our views is the primary means through which we protect our interests, whatever they might be.  Yet ecent events raise serious questions about the currently short-staffed Supreme Court’s capacity to protect the right to vote against 21st Century threats. 

The Sixth Circuit's Distinction between Absentee and Provisional Ballots: Why?

Edward B. Foley - Posted on September 14, 2016, 3:40 pm

This comment originally appeared as a guest post at Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog.

When Should a Voter’s “Clerical Error” Invalidate a Ballot?

Edward B. Foley - Posted on June 13, 2016, 6:35 pm

Not when the state already has enough information to verify the ballot’s validity.

A Tale of Two Swing States

Edward B. Foley - Posted on May 31, 2016, 9:29 am

            Pennsylvania should prepare itself for the kind of “voting wars” litigation that Ohio has experienced in recent years, including a claim that the state’s current opportunities to cast a ballot impose a disproportionate burden on the state’s African-American voters.

Is Ted Cruz Eligible to Be President? Let’s Find Out

Daniel P. Tokaji - Posted on February 17, 2016, 8:00 am

Donald Trump has revived the question whether Senator Ted Cruz is ineligible to serve as President due to his birth in Canada. The issue cries out for judicial resolution, but there are constitutional and prudential obstacles to a federal court deciding it.  This comment argues that the most promising avenue  is a state court lawsuit challenging Senator Cruz’s eligibility and seeking his removal from the primary ballot. There’s at least one state – Pennsylvania – where the deadline for filing hasn’t yet expired, but if skeptics of Cruz’s eligibility want to sue there they must act quickly, no later than Tuesday. Litigating the case through state court would tee up the issue for Supreme Court review, which would be helpful in resolving the recurrent question of what it means to be a “natural born Citizen."


Election Law at Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law at Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law at Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation. Individuals affiliated with the program may in their own personal capacity participate in campaign or election activity, or engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.