In recent years scholars of both the Supreme Court and the Congress have begun to devote increasing attention to congressional attempts to reverse Court decisions declaring federal statutes unconstitutional, while Court decisions involving state laws have not garnered nearly the same amount of attention. We know that the Court strikes down state laws with far greater frequency than federal laws and that many of the most contentious issues facing the Supreme Court, the Congress, and the nation have arisen at the state level. It is our purpose to develop a model of congressional decision reversal action regarding all state laws declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court from 1953 through 1990. Using both probit and regression models we find that the electoral concerns of members of Congress, the nature of the issue the Court addresses and the degree of federal govern mental impact of the Court decision are all significant predictors of both the likelihood of a response and the extent of the congressional response.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barnum. David.1985. "The Supreme Court and Public Opinion: Judicial Decisionmaking in the Post-New Deal Period." Journal of Politics47: 652-66.
2.
Baum, Lawrence.1992. The Supreme Court. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
3.
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Donald J. McCrone .1992. "Of Time and Judicial Activism: A Study of the U.S. Supreme Court, 1800-1973." In Stephen Halpem and Charles Lamb, eds., Supreme Court Activism and Restraint. Lexington, MA: Heath.
4.
Caplan, Lincoln.1987. The Tenth Justice: The Solicitor General and the Rule of Law. New York: Knopf.
5.
Casey, Gregory.1976. "Popular Perceptions of Supreme Court Rulings," American Politics Quarterly4: 3-45.
6.
Casper, Jonathan.1976. "The Supreme Court and National Policy Making." American Political Science Review70: 50-66.
7.
Dahl, Robert.1957. "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy Maker." Journal ofPublic Law6: 279-95.
8.
Dolbeare, Kenneth.1967. "The Public Views the Supreme Court." In Herbert Jacob, ed., Law, Politics, and the Federal CourtsBoston: Little, Brown .
9.
Eskridge, William N., Jr. 1991. "Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions." Georgetown Law Review101: 331-455.
10.
Funston, Richard.1975. "The Supreme Court and Critical Elections." American Political Science Review69: 795-811.
11.
Gates, John.1987. "Partisan Realignment, Unconstitutional State Policies, and the U.S. Supreme Court, 1937-1964." American Journal of Political Science31: 259-80.
12.
Goldman, Sheldon.1975. "Voting Behavior on the U.S. Courts of Appeals Revisited ." American Political Science Review69: 491-506.
13.
Henschen, Beth. 1983. "Statutory Interpretations of the Supreme Court." American Politics Quarterly11 (4): 441-58.
14.
Ignagni, Joseph, and James Meernik.1994. "Explaining Congressional Attempts to Reverse Supreme Court Decisions." Political Research Quarterly47: 353-71.
15.
Johnson, Charles, and Bradley Canon.1984. Judicial Policies: Implementation and Impact. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
16.
Kessel, John.1966. "Public Perceptions of the Supreme Court." Midwest Journal of Political Science10: 167-91.
17.
Keynes, Edward, with Randall Miller .1989. The Court vs. Congress: Prayer, Busing, and Abortion. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18.
Krippendorf, Klaus.1980. Content AnalysisBeverly Hills, CA : Sage.
19.
Marshall, Thomas R.1989. Public Opinion and the Supreme Court. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
20.
Miller, Mark C.1992. "Congressional Committees and the Federal Courts: A Neoinstitutional Perspective." Western Political Quarterly20: 949-70.
21.
Murphy, Walter F.1962. Congress and the Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
Murphy, Walter, and Joseph Tanenhaus.1968. "Public Opinion and the United States Supreme Court: A Preliminary Mapping of Some Prerequisites for Court Legitimation of Regime Changes." Law andScience Review2: 357-82.
23.
Nagel, Stuart S.1969. The Legal Process From a Behavioral Perspective. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
24.
Paschal, Richard A.1991. "The Continuing Colloquy: Congress and the Finality of the Supreme Court." TheJournal of Law and Politics8 (1): 143-226.
25.
Puro, Steven.1981. "The United States as Amicus Curiae." In S. Sidney Ulmer, ed., Courts, Law and the Judicial Process. New York: Free Press.
26.
Schmidhauser, John, and Larry Berg.1972. The Supreme Court and Congress. New York: Free Press.
27.
Segal, Jeffrey.1988. "Amicus Curiae Briefs by the Solicitor General During the Warren and Burger Courts: A Research Note." Western Political Quarterly41: 135-44.
28.
Smith, Tom.1980. "America's Most Important Problem-A Trend Analysis, 1946-1976 ." Public Opinion Quarterly44: 164-80.
29.
_. 1985a. "The Polls: America's Most Important Problems, Part I: National and International." Public Opinion Quarterly49: 264-74.
30.
_. 1985b. "The Polls: America's Most Important Problems, Part II: Regional, Community, and Personal." Public Opinion Quarterly49: 403-10.
31.
_. 1990. "Liberal and Conservative Trends in the United States since World War II." Public Opinion Quarterly54: 480-507.
32.
Solimine, Michael E., and James L. Walker .1992. "The Next Word: Congressional Response to Supreme Court Statutory Decisions." Temple Law Review65: 425-58.
33.
Stimson, James.1991. Public Opinion in America Moods, Cycles, and Swings. Boulder, CO: Westview.
34.
Stumpf, Harry.1965. "Congressional Responses to Supreme Court Rulings: The Interaction of Law and Politics." Journal ofPublic Law14: 377-95.
35.
_. 1966. "The Political Efficacy of Judicial Symbolism." Western Political Quarterly19: 293-303.
36.
Sundquist, James.1973. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings.
37.
_. 1983. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in theUnited States, rev. ed. Washington,DC: Brookings.
