Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

How does the language of legislative statutes affect judicial behavior? Scholars of the judiciary have rarely studied this question despite statutes being, theoretically, the primary opportunity for legislatures to ensure that those individuals who interpret the law will follow their preferences. In Checking the Courts, Kirk A. Randazzo and Richard W. Waterman offer a model that integrates ideological and legal factors through an empirical measure of statutory discretion. The model is tested across multiple judicial institutions, at both the federal and state levels, and reveals that judges are influenced by the levels of discretion afforded in the legislative statutes. In those cases where lawmakers have clear policy preferences, legislation encourages judges to strictly interpret the plain meaning of the law. Conversely, if policy preferences are unclear, legislation leaves open the possibility that judges will make decisions based on their own ideological policy preferences. Checking the Courts thus provides us with a better understanding of the dynamic interplay between law and ideology.

Judicial process --- Political questions and judicial power --- Constitutional law

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Article III of the Constitution established the judicial branch of the United States, consisting of the Supreme Court and of any ""inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.... "" To staff such courts, the Constitution empowered life-tenured and salary-protected judges to adjudicate certain ""cases"" or ""controversies,"" including cases arising under the Constitution. The Supreme Court, in Marbury v. Madison, held that the judicial power to interpret the Constitution necessarily includes the power of judicial review-that is, the power to countermand the decisi

Political questions and judicial power --- Judicial review --- Constitutional law

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Battle over the Bench showcases the complex and, at times, hidden motivations driving the staffing of the federal bench.

Judges --- Political questions and judicial power --- Selection and appointment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

A conservative Supreme Court is poised to roll back many progressive achievements of the late twentieth century, from affirmative action to abortion. In the forum that opens Rethinking Law, legal scholars Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath argue that the left must stop thinking of the law as separate from politics. Instead, we must recover a lost progressive vision, a "democracy of opportunity," that sees the public--not the judiciary--as the ultimate arbiter of what the Constitution means. Offering a nuanced picture of the relationship between law and politics, other essays in Rethinking Law further explore the meaning of law beyond the Constitution and the courts. They look to social movements, including civil rights and LGBTQ rights, for lessons about social transformation. While contributors debate the limits of law in a vastly unequal society, they agree that it remains an essential resource for building a more just world--Publisher's website.

Constitutional law --- Judicial review --- Political questions and judicial power

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Since the mid-1970s, Congress has passed hundreds of overrides—laws that explicitly seek to reverse or modify judicial interpretations of statutes. Whether front-page news or not, overrides serve potentially vital functions in American policy-making. Federal statutes—and court cases interpreting them—often require revision. Some are ambiguous, some conflict, and others are obsolete. Under these circumstances, overrides promise Congress a means to repair flawed statutes, reconcile discordant court decisions, and reverse errant judicial interpretations. Overrides also allow dissatisfied litigants to revisit issues and raise concerns in Congress that courts have overlooked. Of course, promising is one thing and delivering is quite another. Accordingly, this book asks: Do overrides, in fact, effectively clarify the law, reverse objectionable judicial statutory interpretations, and broaden deliberation on contested issues? The answers provide new insights into the complex role of overrides in U.S. policy-making and in the politics of contemporary court-Congress relations.

Statutes --- Judicial review --- Law --- Political questions and judicial power --- Interpretation and construction.