Abstract
The Supreme Court is thickly immersed in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of public policy in the United States. Whether or not the authors of the Constitution intended it, many of the Court’s judgments have political consequences. The Court’s role differs from those of the other branches because its members are politically appointed, not elected. They are, however, bound to maintain the legitimacy of the institution of which they are members. Accordingly, its appointive character does not diminish the extent to which the Court is political, but modulates its expression.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Further Reading
Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report is a great help in keeping up to date with judgments when they are handed down in a rush during the summer, and the November issue of the Harvard Law Review contains a useful account of the preceding term’s judgements. The many American law school journals also contain articles in which the Court’s judgments are examined. However, there is no substitute for reading the full decisions in the original: all good law libraries contain a full run of printed Supreme Court judgments and on-line facilities to appropriate databases. Now, too, anyone with an Internet connection can quickly find the full texts of Supreme Court judgments for easy downloading or printing. Hall’s The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court, of the United States is a magnificent and enjoyable compendium with concise explanatory entries on Court rules, procedures, cases, controversies, points of law, and Justices.
With respect to the large secondary literature, Richard Hodder-Williams’s The Politics of the US Supreme Court and David O’Brien’s Storm Center are excellent introductions to the subject. Hodder-Williams’s article, “Six Notions of ‘Political’ and the United States Supreme Court”, in British Journal of Political Science, vol. 22 no. 1 (1992) provides a helpful analysis of a problematic concept. Schwartz’s Super Chief: Earl Warren and his Supreme Court is an admirable study of one of the greatest Chief Justices in the Court’s history, while Blasi, in his edited collection entitled The Burger Court, and Schwartz in The Ascent of Pragmatism advance our understanding of the Court under Earl Warren’s less remarkable successor. Michael Perry’s The Constitution in the Courts is a skilful and subtle interpretation of the problems of original intent. Witt’s A Different Justice: Reagan and the Supreme Court is a useful examination of that frequently conflictual relationship, while in The Judicial Process, Abraham gives an indispensable comparative treatment of courts in Britain, France, and the United States.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1998 Nigel Bowles
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bowles, N. (1998). The Supreme Court and the Politics of Adjudication. In: Government and Politics of the United States. Comparative Government and Politics. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26454-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26454-4_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-69486-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-26454-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)