My First Assignment: Explaining the US Presidential Election System to International Visitors
After a quick tour of the office and introduction to the staff at the International Programs Division of the National Center for State Courts in Arlington, Virginia, it became abundantly clear that this organization is far more complex than I possibly could have gathered through a short interview or a search of their website. The National Center for State Courts in Williamsburg, Virginia, just a few steps from William & Mary Law School, aims to promote the rule of law and the administration of justice in state courts throughout the United States. The International Programs Division, on the other hand, aims to extend that support for the rule of law to courts across the globe. The hallways of the International Programs Division are lined with objects and souvenirs that the staff has collected while working abroad; their origins range from Bosnia and Herzegovina, to Tunisia, to Cambodia, and more. I came into this internship with some background knowledge of NCSC’s role in enhancing legal education abroad, particularly in Moldova, where William & Mary professors are working alongside NCSC to implement a legal education program inspired by the legal research and writing program at William & Mary Law School. However, I have quickly learned that the NCSC has a wide range of experience outside of the realm of legal education as well. Other projects have focused on anti-corruption, court modernization, criminal justice reform, and more.
On my first day, I was assigned a project connected to our International Visitor Education Program (IVEP). The International Visitor Education Program is designed to strengthen NCSC’s relationship with foreign judiciaries, and for seven weeks this summer, the IVEP will be hosting a delegation of judicial officials from Indonesia to learn more about U.S. democracy, institutional governance, and other rule of law topics. Some of the delegation is composed of members of the Indonesian Constitutional Court, which handles election disputes and appeals. I was asked to create a two-hour presentation outlining the U.S. presidential election system, including a review of disputed elections throughout American history and an analysis of the role of the courts in handling election disputes. The presentation will be delivered to the Indonesian delegation in mid-June on their visit to the International Programs Division of the NCSC. The Senior Legal Counsel will primarily be responsible for delivering the presentation, but I’ve been asked to contribute to the delivery as well!
While researching the necessary material for this presentation, I realized there’s a great deal about the presidential election system and the history of presidential elections in the United States that I don’t know! I’ve combed through Article II of the Constitution, countless sections of the United States Code related to Presidential Elections, and even the Electoral Count Act of 1887 to gain a better understanding of presidential election procedures, the electoral college, and the process of settling disputes related to electoral outcomes. While the 2020 election serves as a very interesting case study regarding the role of the courts in settling election disputes (given the many legal challenges raised by allies of the Trump campaign), I’ve been reminded that the 2020 election was not the only contentious election in U.S. history. From the disputed election of 1876 between Samuel J. Tilden and Rutherford B. Hayes to the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush, our country has endured many challenges in the realm of presidential elections. In response to these contentious elections, we’ve amended existing policies and created new standards to ensure that our electoral system endures. For example, following the 2020 election and the events of January 6th, Congress amended procedures related to certification of the electoral count to prevent uncertainty in future elections.
Figuring out how to explain the long and complicated history of U.S. presidential elections to international visitors has been far from an easy task, but I’ve enjoyed the challenge! While my research has shown that presidential elections in the U.S. have not always resulted in a smooth or seamless transition of power- I do think that the enduring strength of the office of the U.S. President serves as a testament to the relative strength of American legal and judicial institutions. Our electoral system has undoubtedly faced challenges, but American courts and policymakers have historically been able to counter these challenges, and that should come across in the presentation to the Indonesian delegation.
As I wrap up the presentation for the International Visitor Education Program, I’m starting to receive other assignments related to NCSC’s legal education projects in Moldova and in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I’ve also started working on a compliance project, ensuring that NCSC's policies and procedures are up to date with federal regulations related to sub-grants and sub-contracts. I’m looking forward to delving deeper into new projects and to updating everyone reading this blog along the way!