Alaskan Exceptionalism in Campaign Finance
This article argues that Alaska’s efforts in campaign finance reform are closely tied to a philosophy of “Alaskan Exceptionalism”: the view that Alaska is fundamentally different from other states. A recent decision from the Supreme Court, Thompson v. Hebdon , may, however, weaken Alaska’s right to...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Duke University School of Law
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/alr/vol37/iss2/4 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1581&context=alr |
| Summary: | This article argues that Alaska’s efforts in campaign finance reform are closely tied to a philosophy of “Alaskan Exceptionalism”: the view that Alaska is fundamentally different from other states. A recent decision from the Supreme Court, Thompson v. Hebdon , may, however, weaken Alaska’s right to justify its reforms through an “exceptionalist” lens. The same decision suggests the Supreme Court is further narrowing its campaign finance jurisprudence more generally. Without these campaign finance limits, Alaskan politics may continue to be dominated by the oil and gas industry, the very problem those limits sought to address in the first place |
|---|