首页> 外文学位 >Extending rights: A model of state constitutional policymaking under the new judicial federalism
【24h】

Extending rights: A model of state constitutional policymaking under the new judicial federalism

机译:扩展权利:新的司法联邦制下的国家宪法决策模型

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

A number of scholars assert that state and federal courts are in a new relationship, labeled the "new judicial federalism," that began when the Burger Court started in the 1970s to retreat from and limit the Warren Court's expansive interpretations of federal civil liberties protections. Under this relationship, state courts have begun to develop a body of state constitutional law independent of federal constitutional law. In developing this body of law, state courts often times engage in "state constitutional policymaking," interpreting provisions of their state constitutions more broadly than the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of analogous provisions of the U.S. Constitution.;Relying on 592 state high court decisions collected from twenty-five states since 1970 in which the courts interpreted provisions in their state bills of rights, I construct a model seeking an "internal determinants" explanation for state constitutional policymaking. The developed model include variables addressing attributes and institutional characteristics of state high courts, environmental characteristics of the states and differences in the wording of state and federal constitutional guarantees.;The results show that two environmental factors--population and citizen ideology--provide a partial explanation for the extension of rights over the 25-year period of the study. In addition, I find that the effect of internal characteristics of states on the exercise of state constitutional policymaking has varied over time. While partisan make-up of the state high court, population and difference between state and federal constitutional language have explanatory power during the early period of the "new judicial federalism," during more modern times, internal conditions provide no explanation for the extension of rights. This suggests that internal characteristics help drive early innovations by courts.;Through the models presented in the dissertation as well as an investigation of the extension of rights across states, across issues and over time, I also address the past and future of state constitutional policymaking. In addition, I discuss how the findings add to our understanding of judicial innovation, judicial impact, and decision-making on state high courts.
机译:许多学者断言州法院和联邦法院处于新的关系中,被称为“新的司法联邦制”,始于1970年代汉堡法院开始撤离并限制沃伦法院对联邦公民自由保护的宽泛解释。在这种关系下,州法院已经开始发展独立于联邦宪法的州宪法体系。在发展这一法律体系时,州法院通常会进行“州宪法决策”,其解释州宪法的规定要比美国最高法院对美国宪法类似规定的解释更为广泛。;依据的是592个州高等法院的判决从1970年以来的25个州开始,法院解释了州权利法案中的规定,我构建了一个模型,为州宪法决策寻求“内部决定因素”的解释。该模型包括针对州高等法院的属性和机构特征,州的环境特征以及州和联邦宪法保障措辞的差异的变量;结果表明,人口和公民意识形态这两个环境因素提供了一个条件。在研究的25年期间,对权利扩展的部分解释。此外,我发现国家内部特征对行使国家宪法决策的影响随时间变化。虽然州高等法院的党派组成,人口以及州和联邦宪法语言之间的差异在“新的司法联邦制”的早期具有解释力,但在更现代的时期,内部条件无法为权利的扩展提供任何解释。这表明内部特征有助于推动法院的早期创新。通过论文中提出的模型以及对跨州,跨问题和随着时间的权利扩展的调查,我还将探讨州立宪法制定的过去和未来。 。此外,我将讨论这些发现如何加深我们对司法创新,司法影响和州高等法院决策的理解。

著录项

  • 作者

    Cauthen, James Noah Greear.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Kentucky.;

  • 授予单位 University of Kentucky.;
  • 学科 Political science.;Law.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1998
  • 页码 150 p.
  • 总页数 150
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号