scispace - formally typeset
C

Charles M. Cameron

Researcher at Princeton University

Publications -  75
Citations -  3452

Charles M. Cameron is an academic researcher from Princeton University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Supreme court & Voting. The author has an hindex of 21, co-authored 74 publications receiving 3314 citations. Previous affiliations of Charles M. Cameron include New York University & American Political Science Association.

Papers
More filters
Book

Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyze how divided party presidents use threats and vetoes to wrest policy concessions from a hostile Congress and present case studies of the most important vetoes in recent history, detailing how President Clinton altered the course of Newt Gingrich's Republican Revolution.
Journal ArticleDOI

Do Majority-Minority Districts Maximize Substantive Black Representation in Congress?

TL;DR: In this paper, a trade-off between increasing the number of minority officeholders and enacting legislation that furthers the interests of the minority community was explored, and it was shown that such a tradeoff does exist.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Hierarchy of Justice: Testing a Principal-Agent Model of Supreme Court-Circuit Court Interactions

TL;DR: This paper examined the effect of monitoring by the Supreme Court on the behavior of circuit court judges and found that the courts of appeals are highly responsive to the changing search and seizure policies of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Journal ArticleDOI

Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices Revisited

TL;DR: The authors found that the ideological values of the Eisenhower through Bush appointees correlate strongly with votes cast in economic and civil liberties cases, but the results are less robust for justices appointed by Roosevelt and Truman.
Journal ArticleDOI

Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy: An Informational Model of the Supreme Court's Certiorari Decisions

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine how the Supreme Court uses signals and indices from lower courts to determine which cases to review, based on publicly observable case facts, the known preferences of a lower court, and its decision.