{"title":"州总检察长及其对联邦政策的挑战:来自德克萨斯州诉加利福尼亚州关于平价医疗法案诉讼的见解","authors":"M. Dichio, Phillip M. Singer","doi":"10.1093/publius/pjad007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article explains a rising trend in American politics: the increasingly prominent role the state attorneys general (AGs) play in challenging federal policies. It focuses on one particularly important case—Republican efforts to overturn the Affordable Care Act in Texas v. California. We consider how state AGs and solicitors general (SGs) drive policy efforts through litigation and the factors that contribute to their participation. We find, first, that although members of the out-of-power party in Washington are the ones who typically bring state lawsuits, the Texas litigation demonstrates that these lawsuits are also a vehicle by which members of the party in power try to achieve goals that are otherwise unattainable through the legislative process. Second, Republican AGs submerge partisan arguments in “constitution-talk” with the aim of achieving a policy goal that was defeated democratically. We reach these conclusions through content analysis of AG press releases and semi-structured interviews with litigators and other elite actors.","PeriodicalId":47224,"journal":{"name":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State Attorneys General and their Challenges to Federal Policies: Insights from the Texas v. California Litigation Regarding the Affordable Care Act\",\"authors\":\"M. Dichio, Phillip M. Singer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/publius/pjad007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article explains a rising trend in American politics: the increasingly prominent role the state attorneys general (AGs) play in challenging federal policies. It focuses on one particularly important case—Republican efforts to overturn the Affordable Care Act in Texas v. California. We consider how state AGs and solicitors general (SGs) drive policy efforts through litigation and the factors that contribute to their participation. We find, first, that although members of the out-of-power party in Washington are the ones who typically bring state lawsuits, the Texas litigation demonstrates that these lawsuits are also a vehicle by which members of the party in power try to achieve goals that are otherwise unattainable through the legislative process. Second, Republican AGs submerge partisan arguments in “constitution-talk” with the aim of achieving a policy goal that was defeated democratically. We reach these conclusions through content analysis of AG press releases and semi-structured interviews with litigators and other elite actors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad007\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这篇文章解释了美国政治中的一个上升趋势:州检察长在挑战联邦政策方面发挥着日益突出的作用。它集中在一个特别重要的案例上——共和党试图在德克萨斯州诉加利福尼亚州案中推翻《平价医疗法案》(Affordable Care Act)。我们考虑州检察长和总检察长(SGs)如何通过诉讼推动政策努力,以及促成他们参与的因素。首先,我们发现,虽然华盛顿的失势党派成员通常是提起州诉讼的人,但德克萨斯州的诉讼表明,这些诉讼也是执政党成员试图通过立法程序实现无法实现的目标的工具。其次,共和党的AGs将党派争论淹没在“宪法谈话”中,目的是实现民主失败的政策目标。我们通过对AG新闻稿的内容分析以及对诉讼律师和其他精英人士的半结构化采访得出了这些结论。
State Attorneys General and their Challenges to Federal Policies: Insights from the Texas v. California Litigation Regarding the Affordable Care Act
This article explains a rising trend in American politics: the increasingly prominent role the state attorneys general (AGs) play in challenging federal policies. It focuses on one particularly important case—Republican efforts to overturn the Affordable Care Act in Texas v. California. We consider how state AGs and solicitors general (SGs) drive policy efforts through litigation and the factors that contribute to their participation. We find, first, that although members of the out-of-power party in Washington are the ones who typically bring state lawsuits, the Texas litigation demonstrates that these lawsuits are also a vehicle by which members of the party in power try to achieve goals that are otherwise unattainable through the legislative process. Second, Republican AGs submerge partisan arguments in “constitution-talk” with the aim of achieving a policy goal that was defeated democratically. We reach these conclusions through content analysis of AG press releases and semi-structured interviews with litigators and other elite actors.
期刊介绍:
Publius: The Journal of Federalism is the world"s leading journal devoted to federalism. It is required reading for scholars of many disciplines who want the latest developments, trends, and empirical and theoretical work on federalism and intergovernmental relations. Publius is an international journal and is interested in publishing work on federalist systems throughout the world. Its goal is to publish the latest research from around the world on federalism theory and practice; the dynamics of federal systems; intergovernmental relations and administration; regional, state and provincial governance; and comparative federalism.