US Supreme Court Doctrine in the State High Courts

ISBN-13: 9781108835633 / Angielski / Twarda / 2020 / 220 str.

Michael P. Fix (Georgia State University);Benjamin J. Kassow (University of North Dakota)

Opis

US Supreme Court Doctrine in the State High Courts challenges theoretical and empirical accounts about how state high courts use US Supreme Court doctrine and precedent. Michael Fix and Benjamin Kassow argue that theories that do not account for the full range of ways in which state high courts can act are, by definition, incomplete. Examining three important precedents – Atkins v. Virginia, Lemon v. Kurtzman, and DC v. Heller/McDonald v. Chicago – Fix and Kassow find that state high courts commonly ignore Supreme Court precedent for reasons of political ideology, path dependence, and fact patterns in cases that may be of varying similarity to those found in relevant US Supreme Court doctrine. This work, which provides an important addition to the scholarly literature on the impact of Supreme Court decisions, should be read by anyone interested in law and politics or traditional approaches to the study of legal decision-making.

Recenzje

'The study of the US Supreme Court has been consumed by the quest for the Holy Grail of the public law field: precedent. Fix and Kassow are well on the trail. Their book is the most nuanced study of precedent and its influence on the relationship between state supreme courts and the US Supreme Court. The authors examine engaging cases involving the death penalty, freedom of religion, and the Second Amendment. Their study plows new theoretical ground and suggests a path for the continuing quest.' Richard L. Pacelle, Jr., University of Tennessee

Spis treści

1. Introduction; 2. Role of Precedent; 3. Theory of Precedent Usage; 4. Conceptualizing and Measuring; 5. Responses to Atkins v. Virginia; 6. Usage of Lemon v. Kurtzman; 7. Responses to Heller & McDonald; 8. Concluding Thoughts; References; Index.