Towards an Integrated Model of the U.S. Supreme Court's Federalism Decision Making
Disputes involving the boundaries of state versus federal power make up a substantial portion of the U.S. Supreme Court's docket and have undergone extensive analysis. Yet, the conventional wisdom regarding the justices' choices in these cases is that they are highly inconsistent. I argue that this is primarily a function of the failure of scholars to develop a comprehensive model of the justices' federalism decision making. To remedy this, I introduce an integrated model of the individual justices' choices in these cases, which is then subjected to empirical testing in the Rehnquist Court era (1986–2004). I explore a host of determinants of the justices' decision making, including attitudinal, institutional, legal, and personal attributes, as well as the role of organized interests in the Court. The findings reveal that the choices justices make in these cases are not as discordant as most commentators suggest. Rather, they are relatively predictable through the application of an integrated model of judicial choice
Year of publication: |
2010
|
---|---|
Authors: | Collins, Paul M. |
Publisher: |
[2010]: [S.l.] : SSRN |
Subject: | USA | United States | Verfassungsgericht | Constitutional court |
Description of contents: | Abstract [papers.ssrn.com] |
Saved in:
Saved in favorites
Similar items by subject
-
Constitutional conflicts in the European Union : court packing in Poland vs. the United States
Sweeney, Richard J., (2018)
-
United States v. Nixon : the president before the supreme court
Friedman, Leon, (1974)
-
The constitution in the Supreme Court : the first hundred years, 1789 - 1888
Currie, David P., (1985)
- More ...
Similar items by person