Home
Resource
"Is anyone worried about judicial review?" Attitudes towards judicial review in an era of political turmoil
PDF
PDF format is widely accepted and good for printing.
Plug-in required
PDF-1(2.19 MB)
Citation & Export
View Usage Statistics
Staff View

Citation & Export
Hide

Simple citation

Morgan, Kyle J.. "Is anyone worried about judicial review?" Attitudes towards judicial review in an era of political turmoil. Retrieved from https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-mzvc-f935

Export

Click here for information about Citation Management Tools at Rutgers.

Statistics
Hide

Description

Title"Is anyone worried about judicial review?" Attitudes towards judicial review in an era of political turmoil
NameMorgan, Kyle J. (author); Heumann, Milton (chair); Miller, Lisa L. (internal member); Lau, Richard (internal member); Lawrence, Susan (internal member); Redlawsk, David (outside member); Rutgers University; School of Graduate Studies
Date Created2020
Other Date2020-05 (degree)
SubjectJudicial politics, Political Science
Extent1 online resource (vii, 22e pages) : illustrations
DescriptionI focus on two groups that are potentially thwarted by the Supreme Court’s use of judicial review; Members of the House and Senate, and the public. Using an original data set of House and Senate Press releases collected over a three- and half-year period I argue that both Republicans and Democrats are “concerned” about the compatibility of judicial review with democracy, but their concerns stem from different sources. Republicans focus on the classic conception of judicial review being counter majoritarian where the court is invalidating “the will of the people or voters” while Democrats appear to be more concerned with the use of judicial review to weaken the democratic process by harming access to and participation in the political process. From the public side I analyzed a survey and survey experiment. In the survey I explore how attitudes towards different conceptions of democracy influence attitudes towards judicial legitimacy. I find that among voters who are supportive of the majoritarian elements of democracy there is a decrease in their views of the Court’s legitimacy, while those who support civil liberties and civil rights, liberal democracy, view the Court as more legitimate. In the experiment I randomly assigned subjects to a treatment where they read a criticism of the Court based on the language used by Democratic and Republican legislators in their press releases, and the passage was attributed to either a Democratic, Republican, or bipartisan source. I find that responses to the attacks are conditional upon the partisan source cue. However, among those that received a co-partisan source there was some evidence that subjects were more receptive to criticisms that aligned with how those legislators attacked the Court. While the framing of the attacks on the Court may have influenced how responsive voters were to the messages, I find no evidence that these attacks harmed the Court’s legitimacy.
NotePh.D.
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Genretheses, ETD doctoral
Persistent URLhttps://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-mzvc-f935
LanguageEnglish
CollectionSchool of Graduate Studies Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024