Newswise — As the U.S. Supreme Court's term draws to a close, Manheim, an associate law professor at the UW School of Law, points to rulings that suggest the Roberts Court is headed toward faciltating voter suppression, rather than solidifying voting rights.
Manheim, along with UW associate law professor Elizabeth Porter, recently wrote an article in Supreme Court Review pointing to the 2018 ruling, Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, which upheld the state of Ohio's voter-list maintenance process. In its 5-to-4 decision, the court said that Ohio's procedures did not violate the National Voter Registration Act.
After a series of rulings in the Justice Earl Warren era that confirmed voting rights, Manheim and Porter say, more recent partisan -- and unsubstantiated -- claims of rampant voter fraud have seeped into the judicial realm.
"The case is a proxy battle in a larger war -- the war for and against the right to vote," the authors write.
In 2018, Manheim and UW law professor Kathryn Watts tackled the executive branch with a book, "The Limits of Presidential Power: A Citizen’s Guide to the Law," that emerged from a class the two put together within weeks of Donald Trump's election.
Contact Manheim at 206-685-2546, [email protected], or @ManheimandWatts.
RSS