This chapter examines the outcomes and implications of “conceptual confluence,” or the phenomenon whereby two relatively autonomous lines of doctrine—electoral process and free speech law—have merged and melded, affording an accommodation of the values and precepts central to both jurisprudential traditions. While cases involving free speech claims within the electoral process might be appealed to the Court as “speech” cases rather than “process” cases, it is argued that issues of electoral expression are intrinsically different from speech cases outside this domain. Thus, efforts to decouple “speech” from “process” law will, as an intellectual endeavor, fail to appreciate the particular essence of the intersection and development of the two—as one—over time.
Stanford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.