Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1432612
 
 

Footnotes (299)



 


 



The Unexceptionalism of 'Evolving Standards'


Corinna Lain


University of Richmond - School of Law

July 10, 2009

57 UCLA Law Review, Vol. 57, p. 365, 2009

Abstract:     
Conventional wisdom is that outside the Eighth Amendment context, the Supreme Court does not engage in the sort of explicitly majoritarian state nose-counting for which the 'evolving standards of decency' doctrine is famous. Yet this impression is simply inaccurate. Across a stunning variety of civil liberties contexts, the Court routinely, and explicitly, bases constitutional protection on whether a majority of states agree with it. This Article examines the Supreme Court’s reliance on the majority position of the states to identify constitutional norms, then turns to the qualifications, explanations, and implications of state polling as a larger doctrinal phenomenon. While the past few years have seen an explosion of constitutional law scholarship demonstrating the Supreme Court’s majoritarian tendencies, the most powerful evidence of the Court’s inherently majoritarian nature has been right under our noses all along: its widespread use of explicitly majoritarian doctrine.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 55

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: July 10, 2009 ; Last revised: June 23, 2010

Suggested Citation

Lain, Corinna, The Unexceptionalism of 'Evolving Standards' (July 10, 2009). 57 UCLA Law Review, Vol. 57, p. 365, 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1432612

Contact Information

Corinna Lain (Contact Author)
University of Richmond - School of Law ( email )
28 Westhampton Way
Richmond, VA 23173
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 783
Downloads: 164
Download Rank: 104,650
Footnotes:  299

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.360 seconds