Stanford Law Review Seal Stanford Law Review

Most Recent Print Issue

Volume 68, Issue 6


Three Tests for Practical Evaluation of Partisan Gerrymandering

by  Samuel S.-H. Wang

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Davis v. Bandemer ruling in 1986, partisan gerrymandering for statewide electoral advantage has been held to be justiciable. The existing Supreme Court standard, culminating in Vieth v. Jubelirer and LULAC v. Perry, holds that a test for gerrymandering should demonstrate both intents and effects and that partisan gerrymandering may be…


Race, Place, and Power

by  Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos

A generation ago, the Supreme Court upended the voting rights world. In the breakthrough case of Thornburg v. Gingles, the Court held that minority groups that are residentially segregated and electorally polarized are entitled to districts in which they can elect their preferred candidates. But while the legal standard for vote dilution has been clear…


The Long Shadow of Bush v. Gore

Judicial Partisanship in Election Cases
by  Michael S. Kang & Joanna M. Shepherd

Bush v. Gore decided a presidential election and is the most dramatic election case in our lifetime, but cases like it are decided every year at the state level. Ordinary state courts regularly decide questions of election rules and administration that effectively determine electoral outcomes hanging immediately in the balance. Election cases like Bush v. Gore…


Revisiting Public Opinion on Voter Identification and Voter Fraud in an Era of Increasing Partisan Polarization

by  Charles Stewart III, Stephen Ansolabehere & Nathaniel Persily

This Article updates previous findings concerning the relationship between voter identification laws and perceptions of voter fraud. Courts have established that voter identification laws can be justified as measures that safeguard “voter confidence.” We demonstrate once again, but with the benefit of new survey data, that people who live in states with voter identification laws…


Contemporary Voting Rights Controversies Through the Lens of Disability

by  Rabia Belt

People with disabilities are the ticking time bomb of the electorate. An estimated thirty to thirty-five percent of all voters in the next twenty-five years will need some form of accommodation. Despite the significant and growing population of voters with disabilities, they do not vote in proportion to their numbers. We can consider voters with…


Do Americans Prefer Coethnic Representation?

The Impact of Race on House Incumbent Evaluations
by  Stephen Ansolabehere & Bernard L. Fraga

Theories of representation often assert that citizens prefer representatives who are of the same racial or ethnic background as themselves. Examining surveys of over 80,000 individuals, this Article quantifies the preference for coethnic representation among whites, blacks, and Hispanics. The large sample size provides sufficient statistical power to study constituents in districts with minority representatives,…


Election Law’s Path in the Roberts Court’s First Decade

A Sharp Right Turn but with Speed Bumps and Surprising Twists
by  Richard L. Hasen

The first decade of election law cases at the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice Roberts brought election law down a strongly conservative path in cases involving issues from campaign finance to voting rights to election administration. Nonetheless, the Roberts Court, while dominated by a majority of five conservative Justices until the recent…

View Current & Past Print Volumes


Stay tuned for the Stanford Law Review Online’s upcoming Symposium on Salman v. United States and the future of insider trading law.

Recent Online Essays

Bakke to the Future

Affirmative Action After Fisher

Introduction On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court announced its much-anticipated decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, allowing affirmative action in college admissions to continue. No single feature of Fisher surprised court watchers more than its author, Justice Anthony Kennedy. As Richard Primus wrote in the New York Times: “[T]he most deceptive…

Read Article

Data Institutionalism

A Reply to Andrew Woods

In Against Data Exceptionalism, Andrew Keane Woods explores “one of the greatest societal and technological shifts in recent years,” which manifests in the “same old” questions about government power. The global cloud is an important feature of modern technological life that has significant consequences for individual privacy, law enforcement, and governance. Yet, as Woods suggests,…

Read Article

Sexual Assault as a Law of War Violation and U.S. Service Members’ Duty to Report

Introduction This Essay considers when U.S. service members deployed to Afghanistan are obligated to report allegations of sexual assault by Afghan security forces (ASF) against Afghan nationals to the U.S. military. The answer requires applying a longstanding Department of Defense (DOD) policy for reporting law of war (LOW) violations and hinges on when sexual assault…

Read Article


Functionalism and the Electricity Industry of the Future

  Introduction The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) may ultimately rank among the most significant energy law cases of all time. Unsurprisingly, the case has received considerable attention within legal circles and even within the popular press. EPSA upheld one of the Federal Energy Regulatory…

Read Article

In Defense of Corruption

CNN Debates, the Press Clause, and Campaign Finance Regulation

Introduction This election cycle, CNN’s Republican presidential debates have twice violated campaign finance law, specifically by failing to issue invitations based on “pre-established objective criteria.” These violations went unpunished, not because of the ineptitude of the regulators, but because of the absurdity of the regulation violated, which presumes that television debates violate campaign finance law,…

Read Article

Featured Topic in the Law


The current vacancy on the Supreme Court raises questions about the place of judges in our judicial system. These pieces from the Stanford Law Review archives may shed some light.

Politicizing the Supreme Court

If People Would Be Outraged by Their Rulings, Should Judges Care?

The Myth of the Generalist Judge

How Much Should Judges Be Paid?