LEADER 03793nam 22006015 450 001 9910392747903321 005 20230810170701.0 010 $a3-030-44379-5 024 7 $a10.1007/978-3-030-44379-5 035 $a(CKB)4100000011208572 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC6181547 035 $a(DE-He213)978-3-030-44379-5 035 $a(PPN)259462551 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000011208572 100 $a20200421d2020 u| 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcnu|||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aCongressional Constraint and Judicial Responses $eExamining Judiciary Committee Court Curbing and Court Structuring Bills /$fby H. Chris Tecklenburg 205 $a1st ed. 2020. 210 1$aCham :$cSpringer International Publishing :$cImprint: Palgrave Pivot,$d2020. 215 $a1 online resource (128 pages) 311 $a3-030-38083-1 327 $a1. An Introduction to Separation of Powers and Bicameralism -- 2. Reported Court Curbing and Administrative Court Curbing Legislation -- 3. Reported Court Structuring Bills -- 4. Judicial Responses -- 5. Conclusions Involving the Relationship between Congress and the Courts. 330 $a?This book provides a novel description of conflict between the Congress and the US Supreme Court. Tecklenburg?s perspective on legislative constraints on the judiciary breathes fresh air into an important and timely topic. At a time when high-stakes conflict among our national institutions is politically and socially salient, this book will be essential reading.? ?Tom Clark, Charles Howard Candler Professor of Political Science, Emory University, USA This book examines the relationship between Congress and the Federal Judiciary over time. Several aspects of this separation of power dynamics are examined, including court curbing legislation, court structuring legislation, justiciability, and judicial review. Unlike prior works, this book examines this relationship from a bicameral perspective, as it is argued that there are different motivations and reasons as to why and how each chamber of Congress approaches its relationship with the federal judiciary. In addition, this book considers the role of the judiciary committee in the legislative process, as bills that were reported out of committee are examined. Several possible causes of this legislative activity and judicial responses are analyzed, including polarization, judicial review, unanimity on the court, the changing issue agenda of the Court, ideological institutional distance, and divided government. The results reveal that there are important differences with regard to how the chambers interact with the federal judiciary. H. Chris Tecklenburg is an Assistant Professor in the Political Science and International Studies department at Georgia Southern University, USA. 606 $aAmerica$xPolitics and government 606 $aExecutive power 606 $aPublic law 606 $aPolitical science 606 $aAmerican Politics 606 $aExecutive Politics 606 $aPublic Law 606 $aGovernance and Government 615 0$aAmerica$xPolitics and government. 615 0$aExecutive power. 615 0$aPublic law. 615 0$aPolitical science. 615 14$aAmerican Politics. 615 24$aExecutive Politics. 615 24$aPublic Law. 615 24$aGovernance and Government. 676 $a347.7312 676 $a320 700 $aTecklenburg$b H. Chris$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0913662 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910392747903321 996 $aCongressional Constraint and Judicial Responses$92046940 997 $aUNINA