Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Rehnquist Court (rehnquist + court)
Selected AbstractsActivism, Ideology, and Federalism: Judicial Behavior in Constitutional Challenges Before the Rehnquist Court, 1986,2000JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 2 2006Rorie Spill Solberg In this study, we evaluate the individual voting behavior of the justices on the Rehnquist Court in cases raising constitutional challenges to federal, state, and local legislation. Using activism, federalism, and ideology as our guiding principles, we evaluate the extent to which the justices' voting behavior is consistent with the conventional wisdom that conservatives are more restraintist and more likely to protect states' rights in conformity with Chief Justice Rehnquist's focus on federalism. Although we find that there is some correlation between judicial ideology and activism, with liberals more activist than conservatives in general, we also find that the conservative wing of the Rehnquist Court is also largely guided by its own ideological reaction to the substantive policy embodied in the laws at issue. Thus, conservative justices as well as liberals are likely to strike down state laws when those laws fail to conform to the ideological preferences. This result underscores the importance of the attitudinal model of judicial behavior as an explanation of voting patterns on the Court, regardless of the justices' rhetoric in favor of judicial restraint or states' rights. [source] Public Opinion and the Rehnquist Court.LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW, Issue 1 2009By Thomas R. Marshall No abstract is available for this article. [source] The Relative (Un)Importance of Rehnquist Court DecisionsPOLITICS & POLICY, Issue 5 2010ROBERT ROBINSON The Rehnquist Court took conservative positions more often than its immediate predecessors. Less clear, however, is the degree to which its decisions actually impacted the legal framework. Given studies that suggest that ideological heterogeneity within Supreme Court majority coalitions and systematic trends of "institutional thickening" hinder the creation of legally important decisions, I hypothesize that the decisions of the Rehnquist Court should be less legally important relative to prior courts, and should create more important liberal legal decisions than expected. Employing measures of legal importance developed through the network analysis of Supreme Court precedent, I find that Rehnquist Court decisions are less legally important than decisions from prior eras. Furthermore, I find that in the most salient legal subject areas, the Rehnquist Court's liberal and conservative decisions are of roughly equal importance. Given these findings, the Rehnquist Court's ideological impact on precedent is more modest than its critics charge. La Corte de Rehnquist tomó posiciones conservadoras más a menudo que sus predecesores inmediatos. Sin embargo, el grado en el que sus decisiones en realidad impactaron el marco legal es menos claro. Determinados estudios que sugieren que la heterogeneidad ideológica dentro de las coaliciones de mayoría de la Suprema Corte y las tendencias sistemáticas de "robustecimiento institucional" dificultan la formulación de decisiones legalmente importantes, planteo que las decisiones de la Corte de Rehnquist serán legalmente menos importantes en comparación con cortes previas, y formularán decisiones legales liberales más importantes de lo esperado. Utilizando medidas de la importancia legal desarrolladas a través del análisis de red de los precedentes de la Suprema Corte, descubro que las decisiones de la Corte de Rehnquist son legalmente menos importantes que las decisiones de las eras previas. Además, encuentro que en las áreas legales más importantes, las decisiones liberales y conservadoras de la Corte de Rehnquist son aproximadamente de una importancia similar. Dado estos hallazgos, el impacto ideológico de la Corte de Rehnquist sobre precedente es mucho más modesto de lo que sus críticos la acusan. [source] | ||||||||||