Umpiring and Gerrymandering

Jeffrey S. Sutton
{"title":"Umpiring and Gerrymandering","authors":"Jeffrey S. Sutton","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197582183.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the United States, the growth of judicial power started as a way to curb over-reaching, sometimes corrupt, state legislatures and manifested itself in allowing the judicial branch, as opposed to the other branches, to resolve more disputes over contracts, property, debts, and other distinctly nineteenth-century problems. For the last seventy-five years or so, however, something else has propelled its influence: the growth of constitutional review at the federal level, the power to invalidate state and federal civil laws and executive branch actions as well as state and federal criminal prosecutions. This chapter discusses what has become an acutely American dilemma, a fear that the courts will do too little in enforcing constitutional rights and a fear they will do too much. It considers the problems posed in each direction and the risks of politicizing the federal courts if they become the exclusive source of identifying constitutional individual and structural rights.","PeriodicalId":360105,"journal":{"name":"Who Decides?","volume":"723 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Who Decides?","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197582183.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the United States, the growth of judicial power started as a way to curb over-reaching, sometimes corrupt, state legislatures and manifested itself in allowing the judicial branch, as opposed to the other branches, to resolve more disputes over contracts, property, debts, and other distinctly nineteenth-century problems. For the last seventy-five years or so, however, something else has propelled its influence: the growth of constitutional review at the federal level, the power to invalidate state and federal civil laws and executive branch actions as well as state and federal criminal prosecutions. This chapter discusses what has become an acutely American dilemma, a fear that the courts will do too little in enforcing constitutional rights and a fear they will do too much. It considers the problems posed in each direction and the risks of politicizing the federal courts if they become the exclusive source of identifying constitutional individual and structural rights.
不公正的选区划分
在美国,司法权的增长最初是为了遏制州立法机构的过度扩张,有时是腐败,并表现为允许司法部门,而不是其他部门,解决更多关于合同、财产、债务和其他明显的19世纪问题的纠纷。然而,在过去75年左右的时间里,其他一些东西推动了它的影响力:联邦一级宪法审查的增长,废除州和联邦民事法律和行政部门行为以及州和联邦刑事起诉的权力。这一章讨论的是已经成为美国一个尖锐困境的问题,一种是担心法院在执行宪法权利方面做得太少,另一种是担心法院做得太多。它考虑了每一个方向所构成的问题,以及如果联邦法院成为确定宪法个人权利和结构权利的唯一来源,将联邦法院政治化的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信