{"title":"从象牙塔到法庭:加拿大最高法院的合作联邦制","authors":"Mark S. Harding, Dave Snow","doi":"10.1093/publius/pjac033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article provides the first exhaustive quantitative account of the Supreme Court of Canada’s use of the term “cooperative federalism.” We find that cooperative federalism has appeared in twenty-four Supreme Court decisions from 1976 to 2019, and that these decisions have been more likely to favor the federal government than the provinces. Moreover, the Court’s use of the term can be divided between two distinct periods. During the formative period (1976–2009), the Court used the term fairly consistently. From 2010 to 2019, the Court has entered a contested period characterized by split decisions in which the Court is divided over differing conceptions of federalism. As cooperative federalism has transformed from a relatively vague concept into a more substantive constitutional principle, fissures over the term’s application have developed. This article shows how scholarly terminology can have an unexpected and even dispositive effect on judicial decisions, which can reflect uncertainty over how judges understand their institutional role.","PeriodicalId":47224,"journal":{"name":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From the Ivory Tower to the Courtroom: Cooperative Federalism in the Supreme Court of Canada\",\"authors\":\"Mark S. Harding, Dave Snow\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/publius/pjac033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article provides the first exhaustive quantitative account of the Supreme Court of Canada’s use of the term “cooperative federalism.” We find that cooperative federalism has appeared in twenty-four Supreme Court decisions from 1976 to 2019, and that these decisions have been more likely to favor the federal government than the provinces. Moreover, the Court’s use of the term can be divided between two distinct periods. During the formative period (1976–2009), the Court used the term fairly consistently. From 2010 to 2019, the Court has entered a contested period characterized by split decisions in which the Court is divided over differing conceptions of federalism. As cooperative federalism has transformed from a relatively vague concept into a more substantive constitutional principle, fissures over the term’s application have developed. This article shows how scholarly terminology can have an unexpected and even dispositive effect on judicial decisions, which can reflect uncertainty over how judges understand their institutional role.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-13\",\"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/pjac033\",\"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/pjac033","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
From the Ivory Tower to the Courtroom: Cooperative Federalism in the Supreme Court of Canada
This article provides the first exhaustive quantitative account of the Supreme Court of Canada’s use of the term “cooperative federalism.” We find that cooperative federalism has appeared in twenty-four Supreme Court decisions from 1976 to 2019, and that these decisions have been more likely to favor the federal government than the provinces. Moreover, the Court’s use of the term can be divided between two distinct periods. During the formative period (1976–2009), the Court used the term fairly consistently. From 2010 to 2019, the Court has entered a contested period characterized by split decisions in which the Court is divided over differing conceptions of federalism. As cooperative federalism has transformed from a relatively vague concept into a more substantive constitutional principle, fissures over the term’s application have developed. This article shows how scholarly terminology can have an unexpected and even dispositive effect on judicial decisions, which can reflect uncertainty over how judges understand their institutional role.
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.