Professor Tabatha Abu El-Haj contends that elections and voting itself — widely viewed as pillars of American democracy — are somewhat overrated.

"Elections, political parties and voting — while critical to democracy — are not the whole deal," said Abu El-Haj, one of the newest additions to the Earle Mack School of Law faculty and a scholar on the cutting edge of election law.

While the public tends to equate democracy with elections and voting, early Americans understood that juries, citizens' access to the legislative agenda and unfettered use of the public square were essential aspects of democracy, Abu El-Haj said.

In her most recent work, Abu El-Haj shows that there was a distinct shift in the way the state regulated politics after the 1890s.

"We have a whole set of legal rules constructed by the legislature defining the terms in which democracy plays out," she said.

Between 1880 and 1930, the government became much more involved in regulating the electoral process, restricting opportunities to petition lawmakers and controlling public assembly, Abu El-Haj found.

Before the reforms were in place, citizens and organizations could print their own ballots or hold rallies without obtaining permits. Even those who could not vote were able to petition the legislature. Juries could actually decide matters of law, instead of acting strictly as finders of fact.

"We now take it for granted that the state has to regulate politics," said the soft-spoken scholar, who does not shy away from controversy in her work.

The courts have acquired increased authority over matters that could be resolved through the political process, she said. For example, the Michigan and Florida primary battles between 2008 Democratic presidential rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton nearly wound up in court. The Clinton campaign sought recognition for delegates she had received in those states, despite the fact that they had violated party rules by holding their primary elections prematurely. Had a similar dispute arisen between political candidates in the 19th century, Abu El-Haj said, both parties would have printed their own ballots and left a caucus to decide the outcome.

"Everything would have been determined by internal party rules," she said.

Abu El-Haj does not advocate turning back the clock, but said it's worthwhile to explore avenues for enhancing citizens' experience of American politics.

Arriving from New York University School of Law, where she was a Furman Fellow, Abu El-Haj received her Ph.D. in law and society from the university and her J.D. from NYU School of Law. She received her LL.M. from Georgetown University Law Center, after clerking for Judge Harry T. Edwards of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

A strong commitment to social justice led Abu El-Haj to work as a case manager for the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia soon after graduating from Haverford College. But having enjoyed living in England during her junior year at Cambridge University, Abu El-Haj exerted more than a little pluck and determination to return there. She "finagled her way" into a job at the Children's Legal Center at the University of Essex by sending emails to 50 Haverford alums who reside in Britain.

"I think creative means of finding jobs are surprisingly effective," she said.