How can a Supreme Court decision be momentous if it defers to the future the really important questions? Professor Edward B. Foley says this paradox describes the Court's recent election law trilogy. He argues that the rulings are significant precisely because they are so limited, as they reveal the Court's indecisiveness concerning the constitutional law of democracy. Meanwhile, a surge in vote-counting challenges -- Bush v. Gore copycat cases -- may return that issue to the high court's doorstep.
Election Law at the High Court: Big Cases Leave Little Footprints
Special to Law.com
August 18, 2006
This article requires premium access
This article requires premium access to Law.com. Please sign in or subscribe to read the full text.