Placing Unnecessary Limits on Voting and Associational Freedoms

By Scoggins, M. Jason | Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Fall 2005 | Go to article overview

Placing Unnecessary Limits on Voting and Associational Freedoms


Scoggins, M. Jason, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy


The right to vote candidates of one's choice into office is at the core of representative democracy. The ability to organize on a large scale with willing groups of voters to elect a mutually desirable candidate is prerequisite to any enjoyment of this right. If the ability to appeal to fellow voters is too heavily restricted, then society will travel down the perilous path of having its leaders selected by entrenched party leaders rather than by the considered consensus of the people. Last Term, in Clingman v. Beaver, (1) the Supreme Court acquiesced in a state's decision to hamper voters' freedom to associate for political purposes and their ability to vote for the candidate of their choice. This decision, which authorized states to deny parties and voters registered with other parties the right to come together for primary elections, serves, in Justice Stevens's words, "a naked interest in protecting the two major parties." (2)

The plaintiffs in the trial court were a group of Oklahoma voters, registered with various political parties, as well as the Libertarian Party of Oklahoma (LPO), and several Libertarian candidates for office. (3) The LPO expressed an interest in opening its primary to voters enrolled in other parties, (4) and the voters desired to participate in the Libertarian primary without abandoning their principal party affiliation. (5) All plaintiffs sued in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma under 42 U.S.C. [section] 1983 and other statutes, claiming that Oklahoma's semi-closed primary system (6) violated their rights to free political association and free speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. (7) The plaintiffs requested that the district court declare unconstitutional the Oklahoma statutes restricting parties from opening their primaries to persons registered with other parties, (8) and that the court enjoin the defendants--the Oklahoma State Election Board and its members--from enforcing those laws. (9)

The district court denied the plaintiffs' request for declaratory and injunctive relief, but not before making several factual findings that were favorable to the plaintiffs. The court first determined that there would be no significant voter confusion from granting the plaintiffs' request. (10) Second, the court dismissed the state's concerns about "raiding" of minor parties, in part because "[t]he reality of raiding as a phenomenon existing other than in the minds of supporters of closed primaries is a matter of conjecture." (11) While the district court acknowledged that "swamping," or "the control of a minor party's candidate selection by voters affiliated with other parties," (12) might well occur, given the extremely small number of Libertarian voters, (13) it did not view this phenomenon as adequate reason for upholding Oklahoma's election statutes. (14) However, the court, applying a balancing test, (15) held the electoral laws constitutional because it found that allowing voters registered with one party to vote elsewhere could alter the primary results of the party of original registration. (16)

The Tenth Circuit reversed. It held that the burden imposed on the plaintiffs by the Oklahoma statute was severe, and thus applied strict scrutiny. (17) The court justified its decision by integrating the Supreme Court's holdings in California Democratic Party v. Jones (18) and Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut (19) to create "the clear and unavoidable implication ... that a state generally may not restrict the ability of a political party to define the group of citizens that will choose its standardbearer." (20) After quickly disposing of the swamping and raiding justifications on grounds similar to those employed by the trial court, (21) the appellate court found Oklahoma's interest in political stability to be not compelling "in the circumstances of" the case at bar. (22) Granting that "some election results might change if Oklahoma switches from a semi-closed primary system," the state did not show why this "would undermine the integrity of the political process, or . …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Placing Unnecessary Limits on Voting and Associational Freedoms
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.