Judicial Decisions as Legislation: Congressional Oversight of Supreme Court Tax Cases, 1954–2005
نویسندگان
چکیده
This Article offers a new understanding of the dynamic between the Supreme Court and Congress. It responds to an important literature that for several decades has misunderstood interbranch relations as continually fraught with antagonism and distrust. This unfriendly dynamic, many have argued, is evidenced by repeated congressional overrides of Supreme Court cases. While this claim is true in some circumstances, it ignores the friendly relations that exist between these two branches of government—relations that may be far more typical than scholars suspect.
منابع مشابه
Competent Authorities to Handle Complaints about Incorrect Tax Assessment and Collection with an Ethical Approach in Iran
Background: Retrial is an additional combination of the words "retrial" and "trial". Trial is a means of justice and trial, like others, is in the introduction of error and error if there is a verdict that is accompanied by error as a result of the trial. Which must be reconsidered. In the relations between taxpayers and the tax system, a dispute is possible, which can be due to factors such as...
متن کاملCongress, the Supreme Court, and Judicial Review: Testing a Constitutional Separation of Powers Model
Recent scholarship suggests that the U.S. Supreme Court might be constrained by Congress in constitutional cases. We suggest two potential paths to Congressional influence on the Court’s constitutional decisions: a rational-anticipation model, in which the Court moves away from its preferences in order to avoid being overruled, and an institutional-maintenance model, in which the Court protects...
متن کاملSelecting Influence? the Solicitor General
Scholars have devoted a great deal of research to investigating the role and influence of the U.S. Solicitor General (SG) as amicus curiae in the Supreme Court. Yet, we know little about the SG’s decision to file an amicus brief and how this relates to the SG’s success on the merits. We fill this void by examining legal, political, and administrative factors that affect the SG’s decision to par...
متن کاملConfirmation Bias in the United States Supreme Court Judicial Database
We ask whether the widely used direction of decision and direction of vote variables in the United States Supreme Court Judicial Database (USSCJD) are contaminated by confirmation bias, or have been affected by expectations about the likely effects of judicial preferences on case outcomes. Using a sample of generally comparable cases, we find evidence that the assignment of issue codes to these...
متن کاملDucking Trouble: Congressionally Induced Selection Bias in the Supreme Court's Agenda
Existing studies of congressional influence on Supreme Court decision making have largely failed to recognize the fact that the Court has a discretionary docket. We model the effects of congressional preferences on the certiorari decision and find strong evidence that the Court’s constitutional agenda is systematically influenced by Congress. The Court’s docket is significantly less likely to c...
متن کامل