Doctoral Dissertation in Law and Social Science: Attacking the Court: The Logic of An American Tradition

法律和社会科学博士论文：攻击法院：美国传统的逻辑

• 批准号: 0719031
• 负责人: Gregory Huber
• 金额: $ 1.08万
• 依托单位: Yale University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2007
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2007-07-01 至 2009-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0719031&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Law; Social; Science

PI and C-PI: Gregory A. Huber and Stephen M. EngelDoctoral Dissertation in Law and Social Science: Attacking the Court: The Logic of An American TraditionSES - 0719031 Over the last decade, rhetorical attacks on federal judicial power have increased. Yet, while elected officials, interest groups leaders, and academics decry the undemocratic potential of the courts, such speechifying is hardly new. These attacks have occurred throughout American history; some amount to rhetorical bluster, others more credible threats to strip judicial power, and still others are characterized by the passage of measures that structurally weaken the federal courts. What accounts for this variation? Why do more recent attacks on the federal judiciary never rise above rhetoric whereas nineteenth-century instances are characterized by measures passed to structurally weaken the Court? By investigating cases where anti-Court actions are taken, i.e., jurisdiction stripping, court-stacking, judicial impeachment, etc., as well as cases where anti-Court rhetoric is prevalent yet no disciplinary action follows, I develop a theory explaining this pattern. Rather than rely on norms of judicial supremacy as much of the current literature does, I contend that rhetorical attack without follow-through is a rational strategy contingent on changes over time to extra-constitutional institutions, such as parties, that influence how politicians view constitutional institutions, such as the judiciary. Thus, while it may be in politicians' short-term electoral interest to attack the undemocratic potential of the federal judiciary, exploiting the specter of a "countermajoritarian difficulty", it may also be in their long-term interest to maintain judicial power as a useful weapon to implement policy aims. Evidence is gathered from large-N and case study analysis. To construct a dataset of when anti-Court action was considered, I evaluate national party platforms and House and Senate Journals. These sweeps are used to test whether anti-Court rhetoric and/or action is correlated with periods of heightened party polarization and cohesion in Congress. Case study description and analysis of five particular instances of anti-Court rhetoric and action will rely on the platforms, chamber floor debates as well as other data collected through archival research. Analysis of the contemporary instance of anti-judicial sentiment and action will also involve interviewing elected and interest group elites. Anti-Court sentiment is an important American political tradition. While the rhetoric recurs regularly, whether politicians will weaken the Court structurally is politically contingent, and those conditions conducive to attack beyond rhetoric could therefore return. Thus, the recent increase in signing statements, the suspension of habeas corpus through the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the former Republican House's passage of measures to strip jurisdiction in matters related to abortion, marriage, and religious expression from lower federal courts remind us of that potential.

PI和C -PI：Gregory A. Huber和Stephen M. Engeldoctoral在法律和社会科学中的论文：攻击法院：美国传统的逻辑-0719031在过去十年中，对联邦司法权力的修辞攻击有所增加。然而，尽管当选官员，利益集团领导人和学者谴责法院的不民主潜力，但这种言语并不是什么新鲜事物。这些攻击发生在整个美国历史上。有些是言辞上的爆炸，有些是对剥夺司法权力的更可信的威胁，而另一些则是通过结构上削弱联邦法院的措施的特征。什么是这种变化？为什么最近对联邦司法机构的攻击永远不会超过修辞，而十九世纪的实例的特征是通过结构上削弱法院的措施？通过调查采取反法院诉讼的案件，即管辖权剥离，法院堆积，司法弹ect等，以及反应言论的案例，而反训练的言论则普遍存在而又不遵守纪律处分，我开发了一种解释这种模式的理论。我认为，没有依靠司法至高无上的规范，而是我认为，没有跟进的言辞攻击是一种理性的策略，依赖于随着时间的变化，诸如当事方（例如当事方）的变化，这些策略（例如，政治家）如何看待政治家如何看待宪法机构，例如司法机构。因此，尽管攻击联邦司法机构的不民主潜力，利用“反宣教派难度”的幽灵可能是政治家的短期选举利益，但将司法权保持为实施政策目标的有用武器也可能符合他们的长期利益。从大N和案例研究分析中收集了证据。为了构建一个何时考虑反法院行动的数据集，我评估了民族党的平台以及众议院和参议院期刊。这些扫描用于测试反法院的修辞和/或行动是否与国会的党极化和凝聚力的增长相关。案例研究的描述和分析反法院修辞和行动的五个特定实例将依赖于平台，室内辩论以及通过档案研究收集的其他数据。对反司法情感和行动的当代实例的分析也将涉及采访民选和兴趣小组精英。反法庭的情感是美国的重要政治传统。虽然言论经常出现，但政治家是否会在结构上削弱法院在政治上是偶然的，因此有利于言论以外的攻击的条件可能会返回。因此，签署声明的最新提高，通过2006年《军事委员会法案》的停工，以及前共和党大厦通过与下层联邦法院有关的堕胎，婚姻和宗教言论有关的事项剥夺管辖权的措施的通过，这使我们想起了这一潜力。