FairVote's Brief on Fair Representation Voting in Palmdale Case
Working with attorneys from Hogan Lovells, FairVote on January 16, 2014 submitted an amicus brief explaining the merits and legality of fair representation voting methods such as ranked choice voting and cumulative voting. FairVote has advanced fair representation voting through several amicus briefs in cases brought under the California and federal Voting Rights Acts. Both Acts prohibit racial minority vote dilution, and FairVote has consistently argued in court and in scholarship that fair representation voting is a legal and effective (often the most effective) remedy to vote dilution.
Update: Regretfully, the California Court of Appeal denied our application for leave to file as amicus curiae, after the City of Palmdale opposed our participation, principally because they felt they would not have adequate time to reply. Though the court will not be hearing us, you still can, as we will continue to host the brief that we submitted.
- Read our amicus brief to the California Court of Appeal in Jauregi v. City of Palmdale.
- Read our 2006 amicus brief from Sanchez v. City of Modesto defending the California Voting Rights Act.
- In 2013, FairVote executive director Rob Richie and staff attorney Drew Spencer co-authored a law review article arguing for ranked choice voting as a remedy to vote dilution and to democratic dysfunction more generally.
- Our podcast, FairVote Voices (available on iTunes), has conducted interviews on remedies to racial minority vote dilution with political scientist Richard Engstrom, civil rights attorney Ed Still, and civil rights activist Jerome Gray.
- Jerome Gray also authored a booklet on the use of fair representation voting in Alabama.