Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Judicial Review and Coordinate Construction of the Constitution

Bibliographic Data

ID11623974
AuthorsJames Meernik (0000-0003-1748-8391), Joseph Ignagni
Year1997
Volume41
Issue2
Pages447-447
Publication date1997-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0092-5853 • E-ISSN: 1540-5907
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.2307/2111772
OpenAlexW1979100047
LanguageEN
Citations received36
References cited17

Theory: A Congress-centered model of coordinate construction of the Constitution is proposed to predict when legislation, that would reverse a decision of the Supreme Court, is brought to a vote in Congress. Hypotheses: Decision reversal of Supreme Court cases striking down law as unconstitutional are a function of federal power concerns, presidential position, the type of law struck down, public opinion, and interest group pressure. Methods: A two-stage model suggested by Achen (1987) for modeling two interrelated, dichotomous outcomes is used. Results: We find that Congress often does reverse Supreme Court rulings and that public opinion, the position of the president, federal power concerns, and the type of law struck down have the greatest effect on the likelihood that reversal legislation will come to a vote in Congress and will be passed

Certiorari · Concurring opinion · Constitution · Economics · Judicial opinion · Judicial review · Legislation · Legislature · Majority opinion · Original jurisdiction · Political science · Politics · Position (finance · Power (physics · Presidential system · Public opinion · Supreme court · Supreme Court Decisions · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal and Constitutional Studies

  • The Judicial Process and Public Policy

    Kevin T Mcguire•The Oxford Handbook of Political…•2009

  • Strategic Considerations and Judicial Review

    Open Access•Laura Langer•Public Choice•2003

  • National Policy Preferences and Judicial Review of State Statutes at the United States Supreme Court

    Stefanie A Lindquist, Pamela C Corley•Publius The Journal of Federalism•2012

  • Placing State Supreme Courts in State Politics

    Open Access•Paul Brace, Melinda Gann Hall et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2001

  • Congress, the Supreme Court, and Judicial Review

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal, Chad Westerland et al.•American Journal of Political…•2010

  • The Swing Justice

    Peter K Enns, Patrick C Wohlfarth•The Journal of Politics•2013

  • Judicial Majoritarianism

    Matthew E K Hall, Joseph Daniel Ura•The Journal of Politics•2015

  • Case Salience and the Influence of External Constraints on the Supreme Court

    Open Access•Logan Strother•Journal of Law and Courts•2018

  • The Supreme Court, the President, and Congress

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha•Journal of Law and Courts•2022

  • A Separation-of-Powers Approach to the Supreme Court’s Shrinking Caseload

    Open Access•Elizabeth A Lane•Journal of Law and Courts•2021

  • Preserving Institutional Power

    Open Access•Bryan W Marshall, Brett Curry et al.•Politics & Policy•2014

  • Judicial Supremacy, Judicial Power, and the Finality of Constitutional Rulings

    Open Access•Scott E Lemieux•Perspectives on Politics•2017

  • Severability Doctrine and the Exercise of Judicial Review

    Open Access•Garrett N Vande Kamp•Political Research Quarterly•2022

  • Judicial Review by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts

    Open Access•Stefanie A Lindquist, Rorie Spill Solberg•Political Research Quarterly•2007

  • Congressional Constitutional Interpretation and the Courts

    Open Access•Bruce Peabody, BRUCE G PEABODY•Law & Social Inquiry•2004

  • Of politics, self-preservation, and symbolism

    Open Access•Brett Curry, Trenton J Davis•The Social Science Journal•2014

  • Presidential Rhetoric and U.S. Supreme Court Rulings

    Open Access•Matthew Montgomery, Natalie Rogol et al.•Presidential Studies Quarterly•2019

  • An Informal and Limited Alliance”

    Open Access•Brett Curry, Brett W Curry et al.•Presidential Studies Quarterly•2008

  • The Legislative Design of Judicial Review

    Open Access•Charles R Shipan•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2000

  • Information and Judicial Review

    James R Rogers•American Journal of Political…•2001

  • Opportunity and Overrides

    Open Access•Michael J Nelson, Alicia Uribe-Mcguire et al.•Political Research Quarterly•2017

  • Pulling Punches

    Open Access•Anna Harvey, Barry Friedman•Legislative Studies Quarterly•2006

  • Explaining the Incidence and Timing of Congressional Responses to the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Virginia A Hettinger, Christopher Zorn•Legislative Studies Quarterly•2005

  • An Analysis of Policy-Based Congressional Responses to the U.S. Supreme Court's Constitutional Decisions

    Open Access•Bethany Blackstone•Law & Society Review•2013

  • The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins et al.•Law & Society Review•2015

  • Political and constitutional overrides

    Open Access•Olof Larsson•Journal of European Public Policy•2021

  • The Court of Justice and treaty revision

    Open Access•José Luis Castro-Montero, Edwin Alblas et al.•European Union Politics•2018

  • Thesupremecourt Inamericanpolitics

    Lawrence Baum•Annual Review of Political Science•2003

  • Keepers of the Covenant or Platonic Guardians? Decision Making on the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Richard L Pacelle, Bryan W Marshall et al.•American Politics Research•2007

  • Strategic Selection of Legal Instruments on the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Chad M King•American Politics Research•2007

  • Invoking Precedent

    Open Access•Logan Dancey, Kjersten Nelson et al.•American Politics Research•2020

  • The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy

    Open Access•Tom S Clark•American Journal of Political…•2009

  • The Semiconstrained Court

    Open Access•Matthew E K Hall•American Journal of Political…•2013

  • Avoiding Constitutional Cases

    Open Access•Greg Goelzhauser•American Politics Research•2011

  • When the potted plants are missing

    Natalie Rogol, Matthew Montgomery•The Social Science Journal•2025

  • The Influence of Congressional Preferences on Legislative Overrides of Supreme Court Decisions

    Open Access•Alicia Uribe, Alicia Bernice Uribe et al.•Law & Society Review•2014

  • Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions

    William N Eskridge•The Yale Law Journal•1991

  • The Imprint of Congress

    David R Mayhew•The imprint of Congress•2017

  • The tempting of America

    Robert H Bork•Choice Reviews Online•1990

  • Judicial Review and the Law of the Constitution

    Neil Duxbury, Sylvia Snowiss•American Journal of Legal History•1991

  • Judicial Policies

    Open Access•Dagmar Hamilton, Charles A Johnson et al.•Journal of Policy Analysis and…•1984

  • The Statistical Analysis of Quasi-Experiments

    K A Bollen, Christopher H Achen•Contemporary Sociology A Journal…•1988

  • The Constitution of the United States of America. Analysis and Interpretation

    Rocco J Tresolini, R John Tresolini et al.•The Western Political Quarterly•1954

  • The Tenth Justice

    Mark Tushnet, Lincoln Caplan•Journal of American History•1988

  • Supreme Court Attitudes Toward Federal Administrative Agencies

    Joseph Tanenhaus•The Journal of Politics•1960

  • Congressional Attacks on Supreme Court Rulings Involving Unconstitutional State Laws

    Open Access•James Meernik, Joseph Ignagni•Political Research Quarterly•1995

  • Explaining Congressional Attempts to Reverse Supreme Court Decisions

    Open Access•Joseph Ignagni, James Meernik•Political Research Quarterly•1994

  • Goodness-of-Fit Measures for Probit and Logit

    Timothy M Hagle, Glenn E Mitchell et al.•American Journal of Political…•1992

  • An Introduction to Sample Selection Bias in Sociological Data

    Richard A Berk•American Sociological Review•1983

  • Amicus Curiae Briefs by the Solicitor General during the Warren and Burger Courts

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal•The Western Political Quarterly•1988

  • Political Jurisprudence, the "New Institutionalism," and the Future of Public Law

    Open Access•R M Smith•American Political Science Review•1988

Unique citing works36
Citations per year1,38
Citation span2000 - 2025 (26)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 36
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae