scispace - formally typeset
Open Access

Impact: The Supreme Court in American Politics

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Strother et al. as mentioned in this paper argue that the nature of the Court's power is interpretive: it is the power to say what the law is, which gives the Court the ability to make policy routinely, in every case that comes before it.
Abstract
In this dissertation I seek to answer the question: when, how, and under what conditions does the Supreme Court make or influence policy and politics in the United States? In working to answer this question, I demonstrate that the Supreme Court has significantly more power and influence than scholars have typically given it credit for. I argue that the nature of the Court’s power is interpretive: it is the power to say what the law is. This power gives the Court the ability to make policy routinely, in every case that comes before it. Often the exercise of this policymaking power is mundane, but sometimes it is profound. By shifting focus away from compliance—the dominant focus in the empirical literature on Court power—and towards interpretation, I significantly extend the range of cases and the scope of outcomes of decisions covered by the theory of power. Finally, this theory of power allows me to develop a theory of judicial impact. I contend that judicial impact has two key sources: judicial power, and indirect judicial influence, by which I mean any action which is attributable to an exercise of judicial power, but which is not a direct outcome of any power relationship. For example, political elites respond to Court decisions, other institutions rationally anticipate Court action, and judicial decisions can incentivize or discourage activism, lobbying, legislation, litigation, and more. In short, this points to the utility of expanding the study of judicial impact to encompass all policy-relevant outcomes of judicial action, and the theory offered here provides an anchor for this approach as well as a framework for systematizing a wide range of different impacts. I go on to show that the Court’s indirect influence can be seen in that its decisions routinely affect media coverage of the issues on which it speaks, as well the policymaking agendas of the president and the political parties. In other words, I show that the Court indirectly influences policy in a number of ways, one of which is to alter the political agenda of the public and of other policymaking institutions in the United States. IMPACT: THE SUPREME COURT IN AMERICAN POLITICS by Logan Strother B.A., Missouri University of Science & Technology, 2010 M.A., Southern Illinois University, 2012 M.A., Syracuse University, 2013 Dissertation Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science Syracuse University June 2017 Copyright © Logan Strother 2017 All Rights Reserved

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

A Comparative Perspective

TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyze the process of regime transition as an open-ended process and provide an alternative to teleological schemes of the "transition to democracy" in the context of Russia's regions.
Journal ArticleDOI

Who Leads Whom? Presidents, Policy, and the Public

TL;DR: Canes-Wrone as discussed by the authors showed that the public actually does influence policy decisions at least some of the time, and presidential demagoguery is not pervasive. But these facts were only judged for issues within the scope of polling, and presidents act strategically when they attempt to influence policy.
References
More filters
Book

Agendas, alternatives, and public policies

TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the origins, rationality, incrementalism, and Garbage Cans of the idea of agenda status and present a case study of noninterview measures of Agenda status.
Book

Agendas and instability in American politics

TL;DR: Baumgartner and Jones as mentioned in this paper extended their work to illuminate the workings of democracies beyond the United States and pointed out that short-term, single-issue analysis cast public policy too narrowly as the result of cozy and dependable arrangements among politicians, interest groups, and the media.
Journal ArticleDOI

Congress, The Electoral Connection

Journal ArticleDOI

The concept of power

TL;DR: In this paper, the concept of power is defined in terms of a relation between people, and is expressed in simple symbolic notation, and a statement of power comparability is developed, or the relative degree of power held by two or more persons.
Book

Congress: The Electoral Connection

TL;DR: Mayhew argues that the principal motivation of legislators is reelection and that the pursuit of this goal affects the way they behave and the way that they make public policy as mentioned in this paper, and he argues that this is the case in many cases.