There are three general models of Supreme Court decision making: the legal model, the attitudinal model and the strategic model. But each is somewhat incomplete. This book advances an integrated model of Supreme Court decision making that incorporates variables from each of the three models. In examining the modern Supreme Court, since Brown v. Board of Education, the book argues that decisions are a function of the sincere preferences of the justices, the nature of precedent, and the development of the particular issue, as well as separation of powers and the potential constraints posed by the president and Congress. To test this model, the authors examine all full, signed civil liberties and economic cases decisions in the 1953–2000 period. Decision Making by the Modern Supreme Court argues, and the results confirm, that judicial decision making is more nuanced than the attitudinal or legal models have argued in the past.
When we think of judicial activism–the Court's role in making public policy–we often focus on individuals: the Robert Borks or Thurgood Marshalls of the times. In this book, Richard Pacelle explores the institutional judicial activism of the Supreme Court through the dramatic changes in its agenda as it has evolved from 1933 to the present. Once dominated by economic issues, the Supreme Court's agenda is now populated largely by cases involving individual rights and liberties. This shift is hardly accidental, Pacelle argues, and he offers quantitative as well as qualitative assessments of the means and motivations for change. Over 7,500 cases serve as the basis of analysis, and the narrative is amplified by informative appendixes: an explanation of the author's case taxonomy, a chronology of the Court's chief justices, a list of cases cited, and a digest of key cases. The systematic framework provided for tracing historical changes in the Supreme Court's agenda is the first of its kind and is sure to be valuable in future analyses and projections of coming change beyond the Rehnquist Court.
At the intersection of law and politics stands the U.S. Solicitor General. Although even the informed public rarely thinks of the solicitor general in relation to the major issues that have challenged American society, this office actually has considerable control over the cases the Supreme Court addresses. To bring the Office of Solicitor General (OSG) out of the shadows and into the clear light of public attention, Between Law and Politics looks at three hotly contested policy areas?race, gender, and reproductive rights?to see how the office balances the goals of the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court.The OSG is charged with helping the Supreme Court build a coherent doctrine and imposing some stability on the law. At the same time, the solicitor general is a presidential appointee. Deciding which cases to appeal, arguing those cases before the Supreme Court, and filing friendofthecourt briefs means the solicitor general plays an important role in furthering the policy objections of the current administration. Therein lies the tension between law and politics that is at the heart of the calculations the solicitor general makes on a daily basis.Using interviews with solicitors general and their staffs, members of the Department of Justice, and others, and analyzing Supreme Court cases beginning with the Truman administration, Richard Pacelle shows how the OSG balances the competing forces in its environment. His analysis is undergirded by aggregate analysis of the data gathered.This detailed and systematic study will be of great interest to those who study the Supreme Court, the presidency, and public policy. It is unique in its close examination of a number of particular areas of law and the strength and persuasiveness of its analysis of the competing constituencies that face the Office of the Solicitor General. The timeliness and controversial nature of the policy areas Pacelle examines give the book further importance to students of American politics.
The U.S. Supreme Court is not a unitary actor and it does not function in a vacuum. It is part of an integrated political system in which its decisions and doctrine must be viewed in a broader context. In some areas, the Court is the lead policy maker. In other areas, the Court fills in the gaps of policy created in the legislative and executive branches. In either instance, the Supreme Court’s work is influenced by and in turn influences all three branches of the federal government as well as the interests and opinions of the American people. Pacelle analyzes the Court’s interaction in the separation of powers system, detailing its relationship to the presidency, Congress, the bureaucracy, public opinion, interest groups, and the vast system of lower courts. The niche the Court occupies and the role it plays in American government reflect aspects of both the legal and political models. The Court has legal duties and obligations as well as some freedom to exercise its collective political will. Too often those studying the Court have examined it in isolation, but this book urges scholars and students alike to think more broadly and situate the highest court as the "balance wheel" in the American system.
Concern for the appropriate role of the Supreme Court as a policy maker has been one of the most enduring questions of American politics. Richard Pacelle traces the historical ebb and flow of the Court's role in the critical issues of American politics; slavery, free speech, religion, abortion, and affirmative action.s
When the Supreme Court's effectively decided the presidential election of 2000, it decision illustrated a classic question in American politics: what is the appropriate role for the Supreme Court? The dilemma is between judicial activism, the Court's willingness to make significant changes in public policy, and judicial restraint, the Court's willingness to confine the use and extent of its power. While the Framers of the Constitution felt that the judiciary would be the "least dangerous branch" of government, many have come to the conclusion that courts govern America, a notion at odds with democratic government.Richard Pacelle traces the historical ebb and flow of the Court's role in the critical issues of American politics: slavery, free speech, religion, abortion, and affirmative action. Pacelle examines the arguments for judicial restraint, including that unelected judges making policy runs against democratic principles, and the arguments for judicial activism, including the important role the court has played as a protector of minority rights. Pacelle suggests that there needs to be a balance between judicial activism and restraint in light of the constraints on the institution and its power. Stimulating and sure to generate discussion, The Supreme Court in American Politics is a concise supplemental text for American Government and Judicial Politics course.
There are three general models of Supreme Court decision making: the legal model, the attitudinal model and the strategic model. But each is somewhat incomplete. This book advances an integrated model of Supreme Court decision making that incorporates variables from each of the three models. In examining the modern Supreme Court, since Brown v. Board of Education, the book argues that decisions are a function of the sincere preferences of the justices, the nature of precedent, and the development of the particular issue, as well as separation of powers and the potential constraints posed by the president and Congress. To test this model, the authors examine all full, signed civil liberties and economic cases decisions in the 1953–2000 period. Decision Making by the Modern Supreme Court argues, and the results confirm, that judicial decision making is more nuanced than the attitudinal or legal models have argued in the past.
The U.S. Supreme Court is not a unitary actor and it does not function in a vacuum. It is part of an integrated political system in which its decisions and doctrine must be viewed in a broader context. In some areas, the Court is the lead policy maker. In other areas, the Court fills in the gaps of policy created in the legislative and executive branches. In either instance, the Supreme Court’s work is influenced by and in turn influences all three branches of the federal government as well as the interests and opinions of the American people. Pacelle analyzes the Court’s interaction in the separation of powers system, detailing its relationship to the presidency, Congress, the bureaucracy, public opinion, interest groups, and the vast system of lower courts. The niche the Court occupies and the role it plays in American government reflect aspects of both the legal and political models. The Court has legal duties and obligations as well as some freedom to exercise its collective political will. Too often those studying the Court have examined it in isolation, but this book urges scholars and students alike to think more broadly and situate the highest court as the "balance wheel" in the American system.
At the intersection of law and politics stands the U.S. Solicitor General. Although even the informed public rarely thinks of the solicitor general in relation to the major issues that have challenged American society, this office actually has considerable control over the cases the Supreme Court addresses. To bring the Office of Solicitor General (OSG) out of the shadows and into the clear light of public attention, Between Law and Politics looks at three hotly contested policy areas—race, gender, and reproductive rights—to see how the office balances the goals of the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court. The OSG is charged with helping the Supreme Court build a coherent doctrine and imposing some stability on the law. At the same time, the solicitor general is a presidential appointee. Deciding which cases to appeal, arguing those cases before the Supreme Court, and filing friendofthecourt briefs means the solicitor general plays an important role in furthering the policy objections of the current administration. Therein lies the tension between law and politics that is at the heart of the calculations the solicitor general makes on a daily basis. Using interviews with solicitors general and their staffs, members of the Department of Justice, and others, and analyzing Supreme Court cases beginning with the Truman administration, Richard Pacelle shows how the OSG balances the competing forces in its environment. His analysis is undergirded by aggregate analysis of the data gathered. This detailed and systematic study will be of great interest to those who study the Supreme Court, the presidency, and public policy. It is unique in its close examination of a number of particular areas of law and the strength and persuasiveness of its analysis of the competing constituencies that face the Office of the Solicitor General. The timeliness and controversial nature of the policy areas Pacelle examines give the book further importance to students of American politics.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.