Articles for category: USA

The Sorrows of Scraping for Science

Access to data is an overall challenge for researchers when investigating social media platforms' content moderation policies and practices. Researchers need empirical evidence to ground their arguments and public interest research. Platforms have not only not providing data, but are, in fact, further restricting access. Both platforms and governments should make an effort to improve on the availability of data for research, and, to this end, clarify the law in this space.

What Happens Next?

Despite the length of time it took to determine the result, this is not a close election.  Everyone who has felt that the last four years brought American democracy perilously close to collapse should now feel relieved.   Biden’s margin of victory in the decisive states is too large to be overturned by typical recounts or by the usual toolbox of legal challenges. As I will explain in this post, however, we’re not completely out of danger yet. 

Corona Constitutional, Folge #50: Warum Trump klagt

Die Wahl in den USA ist gelaufen, und es sieht doch eigentlich nicht schlecht aus für Joe Biden und seine Chancen, Donald Trump aus dem Weißen Haus zu vertreiben. Sollte man meinen. Aber neben diesem Wahlauszählungs-Spektakel läuft parallel noch eine ganz andere Partie, von der man nicht so viel mitbekommt, eine juristische nämlich, und die könnte es sein, die am Ende über Sieg und Niederlage entscheidet. Worum es in diesen Gerichtsverfahren geht, welche Strategie dahintersteckt und was das alles für die demokratische Verfassung im ältesten und größten demokratischen Verfassungsstaat bedeutet, darüber rede ich heute mit der Anwältin ANJA VON ROSENSTIEL, die in Boston lebt und in den letzten Monaten im Wahlkampfteam von Joe Biden mitgearbeitet hat und dieses juristische Spiel, das die Republikaner im Augenblick treiben, aus der Nähe verfolgt.

What Just Happened?   

The American electorate seems to have spoken and it seems to have rejected President Trump.  But the there is still the possibility of mischief if Trump succeeds in using the law to thwart the election results.  The US constitutional system with its strange and unique system for selecting a president is just rickety enough to make it possible for Trump to litigate his way out of an election loss.

Rule of Judges, Rule over Judges, Rule by Judges

There are numerous reasons why people feel anxious about the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Donald Trump seems more than willing to use the tools at hand to manipulate the democratic game to his own advantage and to use the law and courts to impact the election, to manipulate the democratic game, and to extend Trump’s political power beyond the 2020 presidential election. Judicial intervention has, however, a self-defeating potential in terms of legitimacy. Outlined here is the clash between democracy and juristocracy, and the potential it holds for a latent autocracy.

Stabilizing the US Judiciary by Threatening to Pack It

Reforming the judicial appointment process in the US will take a constitutional amendment. Without it, reform attempts are likely to fail. For conservatives especially, altering the courts now, after securing a very conservative majority unprecedented in recent history, will seem unappealing. They may (perhaps correctly) conclude that, given their systematic advantages in the Senate and therefore electoral college, endless escalation is a game they may be able to win. This blog post proposes a simple mechanism that aims to force a stabilizing constitutional amendment forward while preserving the option to escalate if they cannot secure cooperation from the Republican party.

Confronting Misinformation During A Pandemic

A new report by The Freedom House tracks recent developments in internet-freedom and presents the “Pandemic’s Digital Shadow” on democratic values around the world. The report explains how governments worldwide used the covid-19 pandemic to limit access to information, expand their surveillance efforts, and intensify the balkanization of the internet. It raises the question what democracies should, and should not, do to confront the perils of misinformation.

The U.S. Supreme Court and the 2020 Election

As Election Day looms, Americans are heading to the polls, and they are also heading to the courts. In the past two weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued rulings in five challenges to election-related practices in different states, and there are surely more to come. The litigation has exposed disagreements on the high court, and on lower courts as well, about where responsibility lies for ensuring elections play out fairly and in accordance with law. Of all of the opinions flying around, the one to get the most attention is perhaps a concurrence from Justice Kavanaugh that invokes Bush v. Gore, in which the Court stopped a recount in Florida and thereby decided the outcome of the 2000 presidential election.

On Publishers, Carriers, and Bookstores

The next American election is just days away, so you’d think that most American politicians would be focusing on campaigning either for their own election (or re-election) or for their colleagues and allies who are running now to attain or retain elective office. But not this week. Weirdly enough, the United States Senate took time off from campaigning—even though the official election date is next Tuesday, and millions of American voters are voting in advance of the election or have already voted—to host a hearing whose nominal purpose was to discuss whether a formerly obscure but now hotly disputed statute known as “Section 230,” which plays a central role in limiting legal liability for internet services, needs to be updated.