IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v10y2022i4p831-839_10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Greater public confidence in the US Supreme Court predicts more jurisdiction stripping

Author

Listed:
  • Ura, Joseph Daniel
  • Wohlfarth, Patrick C.

Abstract

A growing body of empirical research shows an association between public support for the US Supreme Court and both judicial independence and congressional court curbing activity. At the same time, studies of jurisdiction stripping show Congress’ efforts to limit federal courts’ jurisdiction are principally related to courts’ workloads rather than ideological differences between courts and Congress. Here, the authors connect these streams of inquiry by testing the hypothesis of a negative relationship between public support for the Supreme Court and jurisdiction-stripping legislation. Contrary to prior studies, the authors find a positive relationship between Americans’ confidence in the Supreme Court and jurisdiction stripping. This result indicates the need for additional research on the interactions among public opinion, federal courts, and Congress.

Suggested Citation

  • Ura, Joseph Daniel & Wohlfarth, Patrick C., 2022. "Greater public confidence in the US Supreme Court predicts more jurisdiction stripping," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 831-839, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:831-839_10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847021000145/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:831-839_10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.