Judicial Behavior and the Rehnquist Court's Federalism Revolution
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6180361 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kevin M Scott (Congressional Research Service, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2008 |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 85-107 |
| Publication date | 2008-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Politics Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1532-673X • E-ISSN: 1552-3373 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1532673x07305372 |
| OpenAlex | W2130129729 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 33 |
Attempts to demonstrate that law systematically influences the behavior of the justices of the Supreme Court have traditionally foundered on the inability to provide systematic tests for such influence. At the same time, attitudinalists have traditionally asserted that the influence of law and policy preferences must be mutually exclusive, which is an unreasonably high standard. In this article, I develop a model of what federalism might look like to a Supreme Court justice. In doing so, I emphasize the difference between constitutional and political federalism but in the context of the judicial role in federalism. The model is then tested by looking at the pro-state bloc in the late Rehnquist Court, finding that four of the five justices can be considered federalists. The evidence presented here can be taken as a test of the influence of law beyond the influence of ideology of Supreme Court justices
Constitutional law · Federalism · Ideology · Law and economics · New Federalism · Political science · Politics · Precedent · Roberts Court · Sociology · Supreme court · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal and Constitutional Studies
Elements of judicial strategy
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited
A Preference for Deference? The Supreme Court and Judicial Review
Judicial Review by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts
What's Law Got to Do with It? Judicial Behavioralists Test the “Legal Model” of Judicial Decision Making
Information and Judicial Review
Rehnquist and State Courts
Reconsidering the Impact of Jurisprudential Regimes
Federalism and the Rehnquist Court
Towards an Integrated Model of the U.S. Supreme Court's Federalism Decision Making
State Merit Amicus Participation and Federalism Outcomes in the U.S. Supreme Court
The Consistency of the U.S. Supreme Court's "Pro-State" Bloc
Placing State Supreme Courts in State Politics
The Congressional Quarterly
The Supreme Court as a Policy Arena
The Rehnquist Court and the Political Dynamics of Federalism
Signals from the Tenth Justice
Measuring Change on the Supreme Court
The Influence of Law in the Supreme Court’s Search-and-Seizure Jurisprudence
Janus-Faced Federalism
Taking What They Give Us
Rehnquist and State Courts
An Original Look at Originalism
Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking
Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically
On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making
Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,29 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2019 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |