Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

The Supreme Court and National Policy Making

Datos Bibliográficos

ID3535237
AutoresJonathan D Casper (0009-0009-5722-1916, Stanford University, autor de correspondencia)
Año1976
Volumen70
Número1
Páginas50-63
Fecha de publicación1976-03-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaAmerican Political Science Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0003-0554 • E-ISSN: 1537-5943
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/1960323
OpenAlexW4235367697
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas39
Referencias citadas3

The role of the Supreme Court of the United States in national policy making has long been a subject of debate among students of the American legal system and of democratic theory. Both the relative influence of the Court vis-à-vis other political institutions and the implications of judicial review for principles of majority rule and democracy have been central to this discussion. Perhaps the most influential account of the role of the Court offered in recent years is Robert A. Dahl's 1957 article, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Role of the Supreme Court in National Policy-Making." Dahl argues that the Court, like other political institutions, is a member of the stable ruling coalitions that dominate American politics, and that its decisions are generally supportive of the policies emerging from other political institutions.Consideration of the way Dahl interprets his own evidence, of Court decisions since 1957, and of other relevant evidence that is excluded from his analysis (particularly the activities of the Court in statutory construction and in cases arising out of states and localities) suggests that the Court participates more significantly in national policy making than Dahl's argument admits

Argument (complex analysis · Certiorari · Democracy · Majority opinion · Original jurisdiction · Political science · Politics · Statutory law · Supreme court · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal and Constitutional Studies

  • Redrafting imperfect legislation

    Open Access•Cristián Villalonga Torrijo•Oñati Socio-legal Series•2024

  • Political Failure, Judicial Opportunity

    Kirsten Matoy Carlson•The American Review of Canadian…•2014

  • Judicial Contributions to US National Policy Change since 1945

    Open Access•Matt Grossmann, Brendon Swedlow•Journal of Law and Courts•2015

  • Judicial Federalism and Representation

    Open Access•Jonathan P Kastellec•Journal of Law and Courts•2018

  • Minority Rights, Governing Regimes, or Secular Elites

    Open Access•Nathan Carrington, Thomas M Keck et al.•Journal of Law and Courts•2022

  • Empirically Evaluating the Countermajoritarian Difficulty

    Open Access•Jonathan P Kastellec•Journal of Law and Courts•2016

  • Representing Public Opinion

    Open Access•Thomas R Marshall•Politics & Policy•2003

  • The Impact of Divided Government on the Supreme Court Appointment Process

    Open Access•Hemant Sharma, John M Scheb•Politics & Policy•2011

  • A Case for Supreme Court Term Limits? The Changing Ideological Relationship between Appointing Presidents and Supreme Court Justices

    Open Access•Hemant Sharma, Colin Glennon•Politics & Policy•2013

  • The impact of the Australian High Court on elite opinion

    William M Myers, Reginald S Sheehan•Commonwealth and Comparative…•2012

  • Constitutional Politics and Constitutional Theory

    Open Access•Mark A Graber•Law & Social Inquiry•2002

  • Executive‐Judicial Interaction as a Factor in Explaining Presidential Policy Making

    Open Access•Barbara L Graham•Presidential Studies Quarterly•2002

  • An Informal and Limited Alliance”

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

  • Court Curbing, Court Reversals, and Judicial Review

    Open Access•Roger Handberg, Harold F Hill•Law & Society Review•1980

  • On the Treatment of Political Parties in the U.S. Supreme Court, 1900-1986

    Lee Epstein, Charles D Hadley•The Journal of Politics•1990

  • How Expected Political and Legal Impact Drive Media Coverage of Supreme Court Cases

    Logan Strother•Political Communication•2017

  • "Landmark Cases" and the Reproduction of Legitimacy

    Open Access•R Shamir•Law & Society Review•1990

  • Friends of the Court

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins•Law & Society Review•2004

  • Understandings of Justice

    Open Access•James L Gibson•Law & Society Review•1989

  • A Question of Justice

    Evan J Ringquist•The Journal of Politics•1998

  • The Supreme Court and Public Opinion

    David G Barnum•The Journal of Politics•1985

  • The Supreme Court as a Cheerleader in Politico-Moral Disputes

    Bradley C Canon•The Journal of Politics•1992

  • Public Opinion, the Attitudinal Model, and Supreme Court Decision Making

    William Mishler, Reginald S Sheehan•The Journal of Politics•1996

  • Public Opinion and American Democracy

    Robert Y Shapiro•Public Opinion Quarterly•2011

  • Law, Policymaking, and the Policy Process

    Open Access•Stephen Barclay, Scott Barclay et al.•Policy Studies Journal•1998

  • Reconsidering Judicial Supremacy

    Allison M Martens•Perspectives on Politics•2007

  • Bringing the Courts Back In

    Jeb Barnes•Annual Review of Political Science•2007

  • Thesupremecourt Inamericanpolitics

    Lawrence Baum•Annual Review of Political Science•2003

  • Constitutionalism and Presidential Prerogative

    Open Access•Clement Fatovic•American Journal of Political…•2004

  • Litigation, Judicial Deference, and Policy Change

    Open Access•Richard A L Gambitta•Law & Policy•1981

  • A Court Quietly Rewrote the Federal Pesticide Statute

    Open Access•Angus Macintyre•Law & Policy•1985

  • Support for the Supreme Court as a National Policymaker

    Open Access•David Adamany, Joel B Grossman•Law & Policy•1983

  • Said and Unsaid

    Open Access•Stephen Barclay, Scott Barclay et al.•Law & Policy•2008

  • Self‐conscious Interest and the Democratic Process

    Open Access•Charles V Stewart•Law & Policy•1979

  • Work Rules

    Open Access•Mark Fathi Massoud•Law & Society Review•2015

  • The Role of Constitutional Courts in the Establishment and Maintenance of Democratic Systems of Government

    Open Access•Lee Epstein, Olga Shvetsova et al.•Law & Society Review•2001

  • The Effects of National and Local Funding on Judicial Performance

    Open Access•Vanessa A Baird, Debra Javeline•Law & Society Review•2010

  • The Diffusion of Rights

    Open Access•Jeb Barnes, Thomas F Burke•Law & Society Review•2006

  • The Supreme Court and the Protection of Minority Rights

    Open Access•Francine Sanders Romero•Law & Society Review•2000

  • The Conscientious Legislator's Guide to Constitutional Interpretation

    Paul Brest•Stanford Law Review•1975

  • A Critique of the Ruling Elite Model

    Open Access•Robert A Dahl•American Political Science Review•1958

Obras citantes distintas39
Citas por año0,83
Intervalo de citas1979 - 2024 (46)
Velocidad de citaciónrecent
Altamente citadoNo
Tipos de citaNeutras: 39
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae