Criticism from Below: THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO REVISIT CASES
The Supreme Court sometimes chooses to use its limited time to revisit earlier decisions. In doing so, the justices signal the importance of reasserting, correcting, or reconsidering their arguments. We find that the likelihood of the Supreme Court revisiting a case in a given year increases signifi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of law and courts 2017-04, Vol.5 (1), p.81-103 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 103 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 81 |
container_title | Journal of law and courts |
container_volume | 5 |
creator | MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P. VANCE, KEVIN |
description | The Supreme Court sometimes chooses to use its limited time to revisit earlier decisions. In doing so, the justices signal the importance of reasserting, correcting, or reconsidering their arguments. We find that the likelihood of the Supreme Court revisiting a case in a given year increases significantly as the number of circuit courts critical of that opinion increases. These results suggest that an acknowledgment of the important role of the circuit courts influences the decision to revisit cases. Even if the Court merely clarifies or reinforces earlier opinions, criticism in the circuits prompts the Court to take some action. Though the Supreme Court's word is final, barring a constitutional amendment or legislative override in nonconstitutional cases, the mechanism of criticism in the circuits allows reconsideration of many issues already decided by the Court and sheds light on the importance of institutional structures to the maintenance of the rule of law. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1086/690086 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1871484395</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26558112</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26558112</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c228t-279dca3e692ea16cb90a5b195e9198b93275a6bb0194c8cf281a696aea8215dc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNz01LxDAQBuAgCi7revIqLCjipZpJmzRzdItfsOBFzyFNU23Zmpp0Ef-9kch6dS4zh4d5eQk5BnoFVIprgTSuPTJjIIpMcIn7u7ukh2QRQk_jlCUWlM7ISeW7qTNdGJatd8NyZTfu84gctHoT7OJ3z8nL3e1z9ZCtn-4fq5t1ZhiTU8ZKbIzOrUBmNQhTI9W8BuQWAWWNOSu5FnVNAQsjTcskaIFCWy0Z8Mbkc3KW_o7efWxtmFTvtv49RiqQJRSyyJFHdZGU8S4Eb1s1-m7Q_ksBVT-lVSod4WWCW_PWGf3qRm9D-PuZmBqbNtLzf9DIThPrw-T8LpcJziUAy78BFi5qKQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1871484395</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Criticism from Below: THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO REVISIT CASES</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>HeinOnline</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P. ; VANCE, KEVIN</creator><creatorcontrib>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P. ; VANCE, KEVIN</creatorcontrib><description>The Supreme Court sometimes chooses to use its limited time to revisit earlier decisions. In doing so, the justices signal the importance of reasserting, correcting, or reconsidering their arguments. We find that the likelihood of the Supreme Court revisiting a case in a given year increases significantly as the number of circuit courts critical of that opinion increases. These results suggest that an acknowledgment of the important role of the circuit courts influences the decision to revisit cases. Even if the Court merely clarifies or reinforces earlier opinions, criticism in the circuits prompts the Court to take some action. Though the Supreme Court's word is final, barring a constitutional amendment or legislative override in nonconstitutional cases, the mechanism of criticism in the circuits allows reconsideration of many issues already decided by the Court and sheds light on the importance of institutional structures to the maintenance of the rule of law.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2164-6570</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2164-6589</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1086/690086</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge: The University of Chicago Press</publisher><subject>Constitutional amendments ; Courts ; Courts of appeals ; Criticism ; Rule of law ; Supreme courts</subject><ispartof>Journal of law and courts, 2017-04, Vol.5 (1), p.81-103</ispartof><rights>2017 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association</rights><rights>2017 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright University of Chicago Press Spring 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c228t-279dca3e692ea16cb90a5b195e9198b93275a6bb0194c8cf281a696aea8215dc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26558112$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26558112$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANCE, KEVIN</creatorcontrib><title>Criticism from Below: THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO REVISIT CASES</title><title>Journal of law and courts</title><description>The Supreme Court sometimes chooses to use its limited time to revisit earlier decisions. In doing so, the justices signal the importance of reasserting, correcting, or reconsidering their arguments. We find that the likelihood of the Supreme Court revisiting a case in a given year increases significantly as the number of circuit courts critical of that opinion increases. These results suggest that an acknowledgment of the important role of the circuit courts influences the decision to revisit cases. Even if the Court merely clarifies or reinforces earlier opinions, criticism in the circuits prompts the Court to take some action. Though the Supreme Court's word is final, barring a constitutional amendment or legislative override in nonconstitutional cases, the mechanism of criticism in the circuits allows reconsideration of many issues already decided by the Court and sheds light on the importance of institutional structures to the maintenance of the rule of law.</description><subject>Constitutional amendments</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>Courts of appeals</subject><subject>Criticism</subject><subject>Rule of law</subject><subject>Supreme courts</subject><issn>2164-6570</issn><issn>2164-6589</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqNz01LxDAQBuAgCi7revIqLCjipZpJmzRzdItfsOBFzyFNU23Zmpp0Ef-9kch6dS4zh4d5eQk5BnoFVIprgTSuPTJjIIpMcIn7u7ukh2QRQk_jlCUWlM7ISeW7qTNdGJatd8NyZTfu84gctHoT7OJ3z8nL3e1z9ZCtn-4fq5t1ZhiTU8ZKbIzOrUBmNQhTI9W8BuQWAWWNOSu5FnVNAQsjTcskaIFCWy0Z8Mbkc3KW_o7efWxtmFTvtv49RiqQJRSyyJFHdZGU8S4Eb1s1-m7Q_ksBVT-lVSod4WWCW_PWGf3qRm9D-PuZmBqbNtLzf9DIThPrw-T8LpcJziUAy78BFi5qKQ</recordid><startdate>20170401</startdate><enddate>20170401</enddate><creator>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P.</creator><creator>VANCE, KEVIN</creator><general>The University of Chicago Press</general><general>University of Chicago Press</general><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170401</creationdate><title>Criticism from Below</title><author>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P. ; VANCE, KEVIN</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c228t-279dca3e692ea16cb90a5b195e9198b93275a6bb0194c8cf281a696aea8215dc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Constitutional amendments</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>Courts of appeals</topic><topic>Criticism</topic><topic>Rule of law</topic><topic>Supreme courts</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANCE, KEVIN</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of law and courts</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MCMILLION, CHRISTOPHER P.</au><au>VANCE, KEVIN</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Criticism from Below: THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO REVISIT CASES</atitle><jtitle>Journal of law and courts</jtitle><date>2017-04-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>81</spage><epage>103</epage><pages>81-103</pages><issn>2164-6570</issn><eissn>2164-6589</eissn><abstract>The Supreme Court sometimes chooses to use its limited time to revisit earlier decisions. In doing so, the justices signal the importance of reasserting, correcting, or reconsidering their arguments. We find that the likelihood of the Supreme Court revisiting a case in a given year increases significantly as the number of circuit courts critical of that opinion increases. These results suggest that an acknowledgment of the important role of the circuit courts influences the decision to revisit cases. Even if the Court merely clarifies or reinforces earlier opinions, criticism in the circuits prompts the Court to take some action. Though the Supreme Court's word is final, barring a constitutional amendment or legislative override in nonconstitutional cases, the mechanism of criticism in the circuits allows reconsideration of many issues already decided by the Court and sheds light on the importance of institutional structures to the maintenance of the rule of law.</abstract><cop>Cambridge</cop><pub>The University of Chicago Press</pub><doi>10.1086/690086</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2164-6570 |
ispartof | Journal of law and courts, 2017-04, Vol.5 (1), p.81-103 |
issn | 2164-6570 2164-6589 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1871484395 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; HeinOnline; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Constitutional amendments Courts Courts of appeals Criticism Rule of law Supreme courts |
title | Criticism from Below: THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION TO REVISIT CASES |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T12%3A31%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Criticism%20from%20Below:%20THE%20SUPREME%20COURT'S%20DECISION%20TO%20REVISIT%20CASES&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20law%20and%20courts&rft.au=MCMILLION,%20CHRISTOPHER%20P.&rft.date=2017-04-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=81&rft.epage=103&rft.pages=81-103&rft.issn=2164-6570&rft.eissn=2164-6589&rft_id=info:doi/10.1086/690086&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26558112%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1871484395&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26558112&rfr_iscdi=true |