IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/doi10.1086-661947.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Multiple-Stage Process of Judicial Review: Facial and As-Applied Constitutional Challenges to Legislation before the U.S. Supreme Court

Author

Listed:
  • Stefanie A. Lindquist
  • Pamela C. Corley

Abstract

The Supreme Court's decision to invalidate a legislative enactment involves both the choice to strike as well as the choice whether to invalidate the statute on its face or as applied. Both choices implicate the possibility of counteraction by the legislature. In this paper, we evaluate the justices' choices to invalidate a state or federal enactment on its face or as applied and find that the justices are responsive to congressional preferences concerning the substance of the legal challenge at both stages of judicial review. Other factors systematically affect the justices' decisions as well, including the legal basis for the challenge, the statutory scope of the constitutional challenge, the president (through the solicitor general), and interest groups' amicus filings. These findings suggest that the Court's exercise of judicial review is significantly influenced by Congress and by other contextual, legal, and political factors, both as to the choice to strike as well as to the method of constitutional enforcement.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefanie A. Lindquist & Pamela C. Corley, 2011. "The Multiple-Stage Process of Judicial Review: Facial and As-Applied Constitutional Challenges to Legislation before the U.S. Supreme Court," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 467-502.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/661947
    DOI: 10.1086/661947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/661947
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/661947
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/661947?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher F Baum, 2006. "An Introduction to Modern Econometrics using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LLC, number imeus.
    2. Tom S. Clark, 2009. "The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 971-989, October.
    3. Pablo T. Spiller & Rafael Gely, 1992. "Congressional Control or Judicial Independence: The Determinants of U.S. Supreme Court Labor-Relations Decisions, 1949-1988," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(4), pages 463-492, Winter.
    4. Justin Wedeking, 2010. "Supreme Court Litigants and Strategic Framing," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 617-631, July.
    5. Mishler, William & Sheehan, Reginald S., 1993. "The Supreme Court as a Countermajoritarian Institution? The Impact of Public Opinion on Supreme Court Decisions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(1), pages 87-101, March.
    6. Anna Harvey & Michael J. Woodruff, 2013. "Confirmation Bias in the United States Supreme Court Judicial Database," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 414-460, April.
    7. Toma, Eugenia Froedge, 1991. "Congressional Influence and the Supreme Court: The Budget as a Signaling Device," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 131-146, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joshua B. Fischman, 2015. "Do the Justices Vote Like Policy Makers? Evidence from Scaling the Supreme Court with Interest Groups," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 269-293.
    2. J. Mark Ramseyer & Eric B. Rasmusen, 2001. "When are Judges and Bureaucrats Left Independent? Theory and History from Imperial Japan, Postwar Japan, and the United States," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-126, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    3. James R. Rogers & Joseph Daniel Ura, 2020. "A majoritarian basis for judicial countermajoritarianism," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(3), pages 435-459, July.
    4. Huy Quang Doan, 2019. "Trade, Institutional Quality and Income: Empirical Evidence for Sub-Saharan Africa," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Mungoma, Catherine, 2008. "The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 550-559, December.
    6. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    7. Christoph S. Weber, 2018. "Central bank transparency and inflation (volatility) – new evidence," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 21-67, January.
    8. Lionel Artige & Rosella Nicolini, 2008. "Memory in Contracts: The experience of the EBRD (1991-2003)," CREPP Working Papers 0803, Centre de Recherche en Economie Publique et de la Population (CREPP) (Research Center on Public and Population Economics) HEC-Management School, University of Liège.
    9. Micaela Antunes & Elias Soukiazis, 2009. "How well the balance-of- payments constraint approach explains the Portuguese growth performance: empirical evidence for the 1965-2008 period," GEMF Working Papers 2009-13, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    10. Fischer, Denise & Greven, Andrea & Tornow, Mark & Brettel, Malte, 2021. "On the value of effectuation processes for R&D alliances and the moderating role of R&D alliance experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 606-619.
    11. Jamie M. Sommer & Michael Restivo & John M. Shandra, 2020. "The United States, Bilateral Debt-for-Nature Swaps, and Forest Loss: A Cross-National Analysis," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 748-764, April.
    12. Mendoza-Lozano, Frederick Andrés & Quintero-Peña, Jose Wilmar & García-Rodríguez, Jose Felix, 2021. "The digital divide between high school students in Colombia," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10).
    13. Fosu, Samuel & Danso, Albert & Agyei-Boapeah, Henry & Ntim, Collins G. & Murinde, Victor, 2018. "How does banking market power affect bank opacity? Evidence from analysts' forecasts," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 38-52.
    14. Cincera, Michele & Ince, Ela & Santos, Anabela, 2024. "Revisiting the innovation-competition nexus: Evidence from worldwide manufacturing and service industries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 586-603.
    15. Amal Aouadi & Sylvain Marsat, 2018. "Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1027-1047, September.
    16. Ryan J. Owens, 2010. "The Separation of Powers and Supreme Court Agenda Setting," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 412-427, April.
    17. Cazzavillan, Guido & Olszewski, Krzysztof, 2012. "Interaction between foreign financial services and foreign direct investment in Transition Economies: An empirical analysis with focus on the manufacturing sector," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 305-319.
    18. José María ARRANZ & Carlos GARCÍA SERRANO & Virginia HERNANZ, 2013. "Active labour market policies in Spain: A macroeconomic evaluation," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 152(2), pages 327-348, June.
    19. Zhorayev, Olzhas, 2020. "Determinants of Trust in Police: A Cross-National Analysis," MPRA Paper 109068, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Brücker, Herbert & Bertoli, Simone & Fernández-Huertas Moraga, Jesús, 2013. "The European Crisis and Migration to Germany: Expectations and the Diversion of Migration Flows," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79693, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    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:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/661947. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.