Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: The Determinants of Countermajoritarian Behavior: State Supreme Courts and The Power of Judicial Review

这一博士论文研究项目评估了最高法院何时以及在什么条件下审查法规。司法审查的可能性是否因问题的突出程度、体制规则(例如，选举或任命的法院)、法官(例如，政党关系)和战略情况(例如，政府的分散或统一控制)而有所不同？尽管这些问题是中心问题，但司法学者直到最近才开始系统地审查影响法定审查的力量。因此，这篇博士论文系统地分析和评估：1)司法审查在不同法律领域的不同程度不同；2)较旧的法规可能是由休眠的联盟通过的，是否比较新的法规更有可能被宣布为违宪；以及3)司法审查是否因机构或政治环境的不同而不同，从而可以合理地影响州最高法院的战略环境。研究设计采用了来自50个州的数据收集和分析。这些数据包括州最高法院在五个法律领域的司法复审案件总数。分析涉及1970-1996年期间提交州最高法院审理的五类法律案件的统计估计和评估模型。这篇博士论文承诺提供州最高法院司法审查的整体图景。

This doctoral dissertation research project assesses when supreme courts review statutes and under what conditions. Does the likelihood of judicial review vary across issue saliency, institutional rules (e.g., elected or appointed courts), justices (e.g., party affiliation), and strategic situations (e.g., divided or unified control of government)? Despite the centrality of these questions, judicial scholars have only recently begun to systematically examine the forces influencing statutory review. Thus, this doctoral dissertation systematically analyzes and evaluates: 1) the extent to which judicial review varies across areas of law with varying degrees of saliency; 2) whether older statutes presumably passed by dormant coalitions, are more likely to be declared unconstitutional than newer statutes; and, 3) whether judicial review varies across institutional or political circumstances that can be reasoned to influence the strategic environment of state supreme courts. The research design employs the collection and analysis of data from the fifty states. These data consist of the population of state supreme court judicial review cases in five areas of law. The analysis involves statistical estimation and evaluation of models of five types of legal cases that came before state supreme courts in the 1970-1996 period. This doctoral dissertation promises to provide a holistic picture of judicial review by state supreme courts.