IN THIS ISSUE

Eva Paterson: Vote as If Your Life Depended On It!

EJS Amicus Brief Charges Unlimited Campaign Spending Limits Rights of Communities of Color and the Poor

Stanford Law Review Study on Affirmative Action in Law Schools Marred by Questionable Data

EJS in Hawai'i: Praxis and Pono

Notes on the Right: Voter Participation and the Right

Civil Rights and Campaign Finance: Summaries of Key Law Review Articles

Preserving Access at the University of California

Staff/Board News and Notes

Become a Part of the Equal Justice Society

EJS Calendar

Newsletter Editors:
Elaine Elinson
Joe Lucero

Email Feedback

EJS Amicus Brief Charges Unlimited Campaign Spending Limits Rights of Communities of Color and the Poor
By Susan Kiyomi Serrano, Research Director

On October 25, the Equal Justice Society filed an amicus curiae brief in the United States Supreme Court in City of Albuquerque v. Homans, a New Mexico case which addresses the constitutionality of mandatory campaign spending limits in city elections in Albuquerque. Supporting a petition for certiorari filed by the National Voting Rights Institute, our brief demonstrates that the absence of campaign spending limits severely restricts access of minority and low-income communities to the political process.

Homans will provide the U.S. Supreme Court the opportunity to reconsider its 1976 ruling in Buckley v. Valeo, which held that the First Amendment allows unlimited spending on political campaigns. Homans has the potential to change the nature of elections at all levels of government and to enhance democracy and equal representation for all communities.

Our amicus brief uses both legal and social science research to illustrate that the lack of reasonable limits on campaign spending has negatively impacted the civil rights of poor and minority communities. It has deprived these communities of an effective voice in our democracy. Our brief argues that limits on campaign spending will help to ensure effective representation and equal access to the political system and will help to open the doors of government to groups often in most need-people of color and the poor.

This amicus brief is a key part of EJS' core strategy of bringing together national experts in legal scholarship, social science, advocacy, public policy, and communications on issues of race, law and public policy. Like the attorneys and social scientists in Brown v. Board of Education who eliminated the "separate but equal" doctrine, EJS advances innovative legal strategies and collaborative approaches to public policy for enduring social change.

The law firm of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin in San Francisco drafted the brief for EJS on a pro bono basis. Martin Glick, Amy Bomse, Clara Shin, Clayton Coon, Michael Gallo, D'Lonra Ellis and John Carrillo contributed to the brief. EJS staff collaborated with the Howard Rice attorneys on the brief and collected social science research showing that the poor and people of color are often locked out of governmental processes and the pursuit of electoral office. EJS staff members also reached out to community organizations to sign the brief and will help to publicize the issues in the media.

The Fannie Lou Hamer Project, Greenlining Institute, Latino Issues Forum, NAACP, National Bar Association, and National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium signed on to the brief; EJS pursued support from a diverse array of organizations and national civil rights groups that view campaign finance reform as a critical civil rights issue. The amicus brief has also garnered the support of nationally-known scholars in the area of racial disparity, wealth and campaign finance, including Spencer Overton, Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School, and Michael Stoll, Professor of Policy Studies and Urban Planning at UCLA.

Through our media and public education efforts around the brief, we aim to bring increased attention and understanding to the civil rights implications of campaign finance reform. We hope that this effort in coalition with other civil rights groups, will show that campaign spending limits will help to level the playing field for grassroots candidates, reduce the influence of money on who runs and who wins elections, and bring us closer to the promise of political equality for all people in this country.