Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2149203
 
 

Footnotes (69)



 


 



Can the Supreme Court Be Fixed? Lessons from Judicial Activism in First Amendment and Sherman Act Jurisprudence


Warren S. Grimes


Southwestern Law School

October 21, 2012


Abstract:     
The paper addresses judicial activism in Supreme Court decisions. It defines judicial activism as decisions that use statutory or constitutional provisions to reach broad decisions that make it difficult or impossible for democratically elected officials in local, state or federal government to implement a desired policy. It offers six content-neutral tests for measuring judicial activism and applies them to key Supreme Court decisions involving First Amendment election law and the Sherman Antitrust Act. A final section of the paper reviews possible reform options aimed at restoring the Court to a role as a traditional judicial tribunal that decides cases or controversies narrowly. It urges a public discussion aimed at refining and implementing reform.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 32

Keywords: Supreme Court, constitutional law, antitrust law, judicial activism, reforming the Supreme Court

JEL Classification: K21

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 20, 2012 ; Last revised: October 30, 2012

Suggested Citation

Grimes, Warren S., Can the Supreme Court Be Fixed? Lessons from Judicial Activism in First Amendment and Sherman Act Jurisprudence (October 21, 2012). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2149203 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2149203

Contact Information

Warren S. Grimes (Contact Author)
Southwestern Law School ( email )
3050 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90010
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 318
Downloads: 68
Download Rank: 197,636
Footnotes:  69

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.375 seconds