
Ranked-Choice Voting as Reprieve from the Court-Ordered Map
Author(s) -
Benjamin P. Lempert
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
michigan law review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.41
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1939-8557
pISSN - 0026-2234
DOI - 10.36644/mlr.119.8.ranked
Subject(s) - redistricting , voting , supreme court , political science , legislature , supreme court decisions , politics , law , gerrymandering , instant runoff voting , law and economics , economics , disapproval voting , democracy
Thus far, legal debates about the rise of ranked-choice voting have centered on whether legislatures can lawfully adopt the practice. This Note turns attention to the courts and the question of remedies. It proposes that courts impose ranked-choice voting as a redistricting remedy. Ranked-choice voting allows courts to cure redistricting violations without also requiring that they draw copious numbers of districts, a process the Supreme Court has described as a “political thicket.” By keeping courts away from the fact-specific, often arbitrary judgments involved in redistricting, ranked-choice voting makes for the redistricting remedy that best protects the integrity of the judicial role.