Political Opportunism, Position Taking, and Court-curbing Legislation

Moyer, Laura P.; Key, Ellen M.

doi:10.1080/0098261x.2017.1420503

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet, almost all scholarship on court curbing in the United States has focused on the relationship between Congress and the US Supreme Court. Important exceptions to this include studies on the United States Court of Appeals and Congress (Moyer and Key 2018) and at the state level (see Blackley 2019, Fite and Rubinstein 1936, Hack 2021, and Leonard 2016. This paper contributes to the later.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Second, members of the legislature (and this applies to other relevant policymaking entities) have the choice to engage in court curbing. They may make this choice for a variety of reasons, including ideological divergence (Blackley 2019, Leonard 2016, Mark and Zilis 2018b, electoral position-taking (Clark 2011, Moyer andKey 2018), and party coalitionbuilding Nichols 2016, Nichols et al 2014).…”

Section: Court-curbing Intensitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implications of Court Curbing in the US States

Catalano

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State courts decide far more cases than federal courts, impacting the daily lives of state citizens. However, considerably less is known about judicial decision-making among state court judges, particularly when subject to court-curbing activity by other policy-makers. This paper examines the implications of court curbing on the judicial behavior of US state court judges. Court curbing aims to diminish judicial independence and alter the balance of powers among branches of government. However, the extent of influence these attacks have on targeted judiciaries is largely unknown. I argue that judges alter their decision-making around cases based on recent court-curbing activity. Specifically, I utilize two novel measures of court curbing, court-curbing intensity and court-curbing likelihood, which serve as indicators of the levels of potential institutional change to the court and likelihood that a proposal will be enacted. These measures extend beyond the simple counts of court-curbing proposals used in past studies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Court-curbing Intensitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of Court Curbing in the US States

Catalano

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

New Data on Court Curbing by State Legislatures

Leonard

2022

State Politics Policy Q.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The examination of the interaction between the institutions in American state politics has long suffered from a dearth of data. This is the case despite the importance of understanding the separation of powers in the states and the specific effects on policy making and policy outcomes. In this article, I introduce a new, original dataset of court-curbing introductions by state legislators. The data include information on more than 1,200 state legislative bills that would restrict the power of the courts. In this article, I provide descriptive statistics for the data, employ the data to test hypotheses, and explain how this data may be used in future scholarly research on the interactions between state legislators and state courts.

show abstract

State Supreme Court Responsiveness to Court Curbing: Examining the Use of Judicial Review

Leonard

2022

Justice System Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political Opportunism, Position Taking, and Court-curbing Legislation

Cited by 5 publications

References 29 publications

Implications of Court Curbing in the US States

Implications of Court Curbing in the US States

New Data on Court Curbing by State Legislatures

State Supreme Court Responsiveness to Court Curbing: Examining the Use of Judicial Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About