Showing papers on "Majority opinion published in 1975"

The Supreme Court and Critical Elections

Abstract: Several years ago Professor Robert Dahl argued that the traditional concern over the Supreme Court's power of judicial review was largely unfounded. Dahl demonstrated that seldom, if ever, had the Court been successful in blocking the will of a law-making majority. This paper argues that, had Dahl considered his data from a different perspective, he would have discovered that, by virtue of the recruitment process, the Court will rarely even attempt to thwart a law-making majority. Examining Dahl's data in the context of the Survey Research Center's election classification scheme, the paper focuses on the Court's relation to patterns of partisan change to show that the traditional philosophic concern with the counter-majoritarian nature of judicial review is largely divorced from empirical reality and has relevance only during periods of partisan realignment within the political system as a whole. The paper buttresses the argument that the Court's “yea-saying” power is more important than its “nay-saying” power, a realization which can serve as the premise from which a logically consistent justification of the Court's power of judicial review may be dialectically constructed.

Minority influence: The effect of majority reactionaries and defectors, and minority and majority compromisers, upon majority opinion and attraction

Abstract: The effects of shifting opinions within a group upon majority opinion, communication between members and perceived attractiveness of other members were studied. Each subject perceived himself to be a member of the majority in a group whose opinion was divided 6–2 on an important issue. But later one to three group members changed their vote. Six conditions of change were established: Control, majority reactionary, majority compromise, majority defection (5-3), minority compromise, minority compromise plus majority reactionary. Only majority compromise or defection affected majority opinion (private and public). Majority members were disliked when they deviated from majority opinion, but particularly so when they shifted toward minority opinion. Minority members were liked most when they induced a majority member to compromise (but not defect). Majority communication to minority occurred most when the minority was compromising, but most disagreement with minority opinion was expressed when a majority member had either compromised or defected.

Gender in the Supreme Court: The 1973 and 1974 Terms

Abstract: Supreme Court discourse on gender1 and the Constitution, as the record stood at the start of 1975, bemused lower courts and law review contributors. As the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia described the state of adjudication, precedent was "still evolving," "rapidly changing, and variously interpreted."2 A concerned and perceptive Court watcher in this area concluded: "[T]he Court is not certain what constitutes sex discrimination, how virulent this form of discrimination is or how it should be analyzed in terms of due process and equal protection."' These appraisals derived from the vacillation that followed the Court's break from a consistent affirmation of governmental authority to classify by gender unbroken until 1971. There was quick movement in a new direction in 1971-73. 1974 saw retrenchment or at least lineholding. 1975 brought the Court back to the 1971-73 track. Momentum in the new direction built up, but the

Some thoughts on the future of the International Court of Justice

Abstract: For some years the future of the International Court of Justice has been a matter of growing concern to supporters of international adjudication as a way of settling legal disputes between States This concern has also made itself felt inside the Organization of the United Nations, where the review of the role of the Court was a standing item on the agenda of the General Assembly for a number of years until the adoption on 22 November 1974 of resolution 3232 (XXIX) In this resolution the General Assembly inter alia expressed its satisfaction with the Court's 1972 revision of its Rules, and called upon States to have recourse to the Court more often

"Last Tango in Paris, et al. v. The Supreme Court": The Current State of Obscenity Law.

Abstract: (1975). Last Tango in Paris, et al. V. the supreme court: The current state of obscenity law. Quarterly Journal of Speech: Vol. 61, No. 3, pp. 279-289.