美国最高法院不是达连法院

IF 0.5 3区社会学 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Studies in American Political Development Pub Date : 2022-08-26 DOI:10.1017/s0898588x22000189

Paul Baumgardner, Calvin Terbeek

{"title":"美国最高法院不是达连法院","authors":"Paul Baumgardner, Calvin Terbeek","doi":"10.1017/s0898588x22000189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Robert Dahl's “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker” has long enjoyed pride of place within American politics scholarship, especially among regime theorists. However, Dahl's views of the U.S. Supreme Court are no longer defensible. It is essential for our field to move beyond “Decision-Making in a Democracy” in order to better theorize and explain the modern Supreme Court.","PeriodicalId":45195,"journal":{"name":"Studies in American Political Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The U.S. Supreme Court Is Not a Dahlian Court\",\"authors\":\"Paul Baumgardner, Calvin Terbeek\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0898588x22000189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Robert Dahl's “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker” has long enjoyed pride of place within American politics scholarship, especially among regime theorists. However, Dahl's views of the U.S. Supreme Court are no longer defensible. It is essential for our field to move beyond “Decision-Making in a Democracy” in order to better theorize and explain the modern Supreme Court.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in American Political Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in American Political Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0898588x22000189\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in American Political Development","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0898588x22000189","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

罗伯特·达尔的《民主中的决策:作为国家决策者的最高法院》长期以来在美国政治学界，特别是在政权理论家中享有重要地位。然而，达尔对美国最高法院的看法不再站得住脚。为了更好地理论化和解释现代最高法院，我们的领域有必要超越“民主中的决策”。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The U.S. Supreme Court Is Not a Dahlian Court

Abstract Robert Dahl's “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker” has long enjoyed pride of place within American politics scholarship, especially among regime theorists. However, Dahl's views of the U.S. Supreme Court are no longer defensible. It is essential for our field to move beyond “Decision-Making in a Democracy” in order to better theorize and explain the modern Supreme Court.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Studies in American Political Development POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Studies in American Political Development (SAPD) publishes scholarship on political change and institutional development in the United States from a variety of theoretical viewpoints. Articles focus on governmental institutions over time and on their social, economic and cultural setting. In-depth presentation in a longer format allows contributors to elaborate on the complex patterns of state-society relations. SAPD encourages an interdisciplinary approach and recognizes the value of comparative perspectives.