State Supreme Court Responsiveness to Court Curbing: Examining the Use of Judicial Review

References

• Bartles, B., and C. Johnston. 2020. Curbing the Court: Why the Public Constrains Judicial Independence. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, W., R. Fording, E. Ringquist, R. Hanson, and C. Klarner. 2010. “Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the U.S. States: A Re-appraisal.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 10 (2):117–35. doi: 10.1177/153244001001000201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackley, K. 2019. “Court Curbing in the State House: Why State Legislators Attack Their Courts.” Justice System Journal 40 (4):269–85. doi: 10.1080/0098261X.2019.1650678.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonica, A., and M. Woodruff. 2014. “A Common-Space Measure of State Supreme Court Ideology.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 31 (3):472–98. doi: 10.1093/jleo/ewu016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosworth, M. 2017. “Legislative Responses to Unconstitutionality: A View from the States.” Journal of Law and Courts 5 (2):243–66. doi: 10.1086/692990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brace, P., and B. D. Boyea. 2008. “State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty, and the Practice of Electing Judges.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (2):360–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canes-Wrone, B., T. Clark, and J. Park. 2012. “Judicial Independence and Retention Elections.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 28 (2):211–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canes-Wrone, B.., T. S. Clark, and J. P. Kelly. 2014. “Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions.” American Political Science Review 108 (1):23–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, T. 2009. “The Separation of Powers, Court-curbing and Judicial Legitimacy.” American Journal of Political Science 53 (4):971–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00411.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, T. 2011. The Limits of Judicial Independence. Cambridge University Press: New York.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, J., and R. Hartley. 2001. “Judicial Independence and State Court Budget Strategies: Clues from Oklahoma and Virginia.” Administration & Society 33 (1):54–78. doi: 10.1177/00953990122019686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, J., and R. Hartley. 2001. “State Court Strategies and Politics during the Appropriations Process.” Public Budgeting & Finance 21 (1):35–57. doi: 10.1111/0275-1100.00035.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, J., and R. Hartley. 2003. “The Politics of Court Budgeting in the States: Is Judicial Independence Threatened?” Public Administration Review 63 (4):441–54. doi: 10.1111/1540-6210.00307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gavel to Gavel blog Database. http://gaveltogavel.us/site/database
   Google Scholar
• Hack, J. 2022. “Why Do Lawmakers Sanction State Courts?” The Journal of Legislative Studies 28 (2):278–97. online first. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2021.1872177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, R., and J. Douglas. 2003. “Budgeting for State Courts: The Perceptions of Key Officials regarding the Determinants of Budget Success.” Justice System Journal 24 (3):251–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, G. 2014. “Judicial Deference and Executive Control over Administrative Agencies.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 14 (2):142–64. doi: 10.1177/1532440013520243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, G. 2015. “Executive Power and Judicial Deference: Judicial Decision Making on Executive Power Challenges in the American States.” Political Research Quarterly 68 (1):128–41. doi: 10.1177/1065912914561798.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer, L. 2002. Judicial Review in State Supreme Courts: A Comparative Study. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Langer, L. 2003. “Strategic Considerations and Judicial Review: The Case of Workers’ Compensation Laws in the American States.” Public Choice 116 (1/2):55–78. doi: 10.1023/A:1024263103610.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer, L., and P. Brace. 2005. “The Preemptive Power of State Supreme Courts: Adoption of Abortion and Death Penalty Legislation.” Policy Studies Journal 33 (3):317–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00118.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard, M. 2016. “State Legislatures, State High Courts, and Judicial Independence: An Examination of Court-Curbing Legislation in the States.” Justice System Journal 37 (1):53–62. doi: 10.1080/0098261X.2015.1024568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard, M. 2014. “Elections and Decision-Making on State High Courts: Examining Legitimacy and Judicial Review.” Justice System Journal 35 (1):45–61. doi: 10.1080/0098261X.2013.868282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mark, A., and M. Zilis. 2018. “Blurring Institutional Boundaries: Judges Perceptions of Threats to Judicial Independence.” Journal of Law and Courts 6 (2):333–53. doi: 10.1086/695743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mark, A, and M. Zilis. 2019. “The Conditional Effectiveness of Legislative Threats: How Court Curbing Alters the Behavior of (Some) Supreme Court Justices.” Political Research Quarterly 72 (3):570–83. doi: 10.1177/1065912918798501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer, L., and E. Key. 2018. “Political Opportunism, Position Taking, and Court-curbing Legislation.” Justice System Journal 39 (2):155–70. doi: 10.1080/0098261X.2017.1420503.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagel, S. 1965. “Court Curbing Periods in American History.” Vanderbilt Law Review 18 (3):925–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, G. 1992. “Judicial Independence and the Reality of Political Power.” The Review of Politics 54 (3):369–98. doi: 10.1017/S0034670500018222.
   Google Scholar
• Wilhelm, T., R. Vining, E. Boldt, and B. Black. 2020. “Judicial Reform in the American States: The Chief Justice as Political Advocate.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 20 (2):135–56. doi: 10.1177/1532440020907975.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windett, J., J. Harden, and M. Hall. 2015. “Estimating Dynamic Ideal Points for State Supreme Courts.” Political Analysis 23 (3):461–9. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpv016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar