Holding the Accountability Problem Accountable: Response Mechanisms to Counter-Majoritarian Decisions
If the Supreme Court rules against the wishes of the majority, how can that majority respond? I argue that while federal judges will never stand for election, majorities can employ various response mechanisms to counter-majoritarian decisions. I draw out observable expectations for inter-branch, local, and electoral responses. I then test these expectations in cases from the “mature” New Deal—communism, school prayer, busing, and abortion—showing the range of effective results achieved by anti-Court majorities. Given these results, I conclude that there is no “accountability problem”; there is just a narrow definition of accountability.
Ackerman, Bruce. 2005. The Failure of the Founding Fathers: Jefferson, Marshall, and the Rise of Presidential Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674020054
Barnes, Jeb. 2007. "Bringing the Courts Back In: Interbranch Perspectives on the Role of Courts in American Politics and Policy Making." Annual Review of Political Science 10: 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.080505.101210
Barnes, Jeb. 2003. "Congressional Compromise on Election Reform: A Look Forward and Backward." In After 2000: The Politics of Election Reform, ed. Ann N. Crigler, Marion R. Just, and Edward J. McCaffery, 117–132. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beck, Glenn. 2008. "Frightening Obama." 27 October 2008. glennbeck.com.
Bickel, Alexander M. 1962. The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. New York: Bobs-Merrill Co.
Blake, Judith. 1977. "The Supreme Court's Abortion Decisions and Public Opinion in the United States." Population and Development Review 3: 50. https://doi.org/10.2307/1971759
Bork, Robert H. 1996. Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline. New York: Regan Books.
Buchanan, Patrick. 1972. "Assault Strategy." Memorandum to John Mitchell. 6 June 1972.
Buchanan, Patrick. 1971. "The Muskie Watch." Memorandum for the President. 24 March 1971.
Clark, Tom S. 2010. The Limits of Judicial Independence. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761867
Congressional Record, 1973.
Congressional Record, 1962.
Congressional Record, 1958.
Cook, Daniel M., and Andrew J. Polsky. 2005. "Political Time Reconsidered: Unbuilding and Rebuilding the State under the Reagan Administration." American Politics Research 33: 577–605. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X04270520
Crockett, David A. 2002. The Opposition Presidency: Leadership and the Constraints of History. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
Dahl, Robert A. 2003. How Democratic is the American Constitution? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dahl, Robert A. 1957. "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker." Journal of Public Law 6: 293.
Direnfield, Bruce J. 2007. The Battle over School Prayer: How Engel v. Vitale Changed America. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
"Dividing the Democrats." 1971. Memorandum to the Attorney General H.R. Haldeman. 5 October 1971.
Dowd, Maureen. 2012. "Men in Black." 3 April 2012. nytimes.com.
Dolbeare, Kenneth M., and Phillip E. Hammond. 1971. The School Prayer Decisions From Court Policy to Local Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Engel, Stephen. 2011. American Politicians Confront the Courts: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511994890
Ely, John Hart. 1981. Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ford, Gerald. "The President's News Conference." 9 October 1974. americanpresidency.org.
Friedman, Barry. 2002. "The Birth of an Academic Obsession: The History of the Countermajoritarian Difficulty, Part Five." Yale Law Journal 112: 153–259. https://doi.org/10.2307/1562239
Gallup. 1963. "The Gallup Poll."
Gallup. 1971. "The Gallup Poll."
Gillman, Howard. 2006. "Regime Politics, Jurisprudential Regimes, and Unenumerated Rights." University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 9: 107–119.
Gillman, Howard. 2002. "How Political Parties Can use the Courts to Advance Their Agendas: Federal Courts in the United States, 1875–1891." American Political Science Review 96: 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402000291
Gottfried, Paul. 1992. The Conservative Movement. Twayne Publishers.
Graber, Mark A. 2008a. "The Countermajoritarian Difficulty: From Congress to the Courts to Constitutional Order." Annual Reviews in Law and Social Science 4: 361. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172404
Graber, Mark A. 2008b. "Regime Politics and the Countermajoritarian Problem." Balkinization Blog. balkin.blogspot.com.
Graber, Mark A. 2005. "Constructing Judicial Review." Annual Review of Political Science 8: 446. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104905
Graber, Mark A. 1993. "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary." Studies in American Political Development 7: 35–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X00000687
Henshaw, Stanley K., Jacqueline Darroch Forrest, and Ellen Blaine. 1984. "Abortion Services in the United States, 1981 and 1982." Family Planning Perspectives 17: 90–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/2135271
Hillygus, D. Sunshine, and Todd G. Shields. 2008. The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential Campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831593
Kernell, Samuel. 2006. Going Public. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Klarman, Michael. "Rethinking the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Revolutions." Virginia Law Review 82: 1–67.
K'Meyer, Tracy Elaine. 2013. From Brown to Meredity: The Long Struggle for School Desegregation in Louisville, Kentuck, 1954–2007. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.
Lemieux, Scott E., and David J. Watkins. 2009. "Beyond the 'Countermajoritarian Difficulty': lessons from Contemporary Democratic Theory." Polity 41: 30–62. https://doi.org/10.1057/pol.2008.25
Levinson, Sanford. 2008. Our Undemocratic Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lovell, George. 2003. Legislative Deferrals: Statutory Ambiguity, Judicial Power, and American Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mason, Robert. 2004. Richard Nixon and the Quest for a New Majority. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
"Mayor Asks Federal Help in Boston School Dispute." The Bulletin. 10 October 1974. news.google.com.
McMahon, Kevin J. 2004. Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race: How the Presidency Paved the Road to Brown. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Metcalf, George R. 1983. From Little Rock to Boston: The History of School Desegregation. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Miles, Michael W. 1980. The Odyssey of the American Right. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nash, George H. 1976. The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945. New York: Basic Books.
National Opinion Research Center, 1954. "The Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties Study."
Newman, Roger K. 2001. "The Warren Court and American Politics: An Impressionistic Appreciation." Constitutional Commentary 18: 661–698.
Nichols, Curt, Dave Bridge, and Adam Carrington. 2014. "Court-Curbing via Attempt to Amend the Constitution: An Update of Congressional Attacks on the Supreme Court from 1955–1984." Justice Systems Journal: 1–13.
Nixon, Richard. 1972a. "The President's News Conference." 22 June 1972. americanpresidency.org.
Nixon, Richard. 1972b. "Remarks and Question-and-Answer Session." 30 April 1972. americanpresidency.org.
Nixon, Richard 1972c. "The President's News Conference." 5 October 1972. americanpresidency.org.
Nixon, Richard. 1971. "Statement about the Busing of Schoolchildren." 3 August 1971. americanpresidency.org.
Obama, Barack. 2012. "News Conference." 2 April 2012. americanpresidency.org.
Peretti, Terri Jennings. 1999. In Defense of a Political Court. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Phillips, Kevin P. 1972a. "School Busing and Public Opinion." The Bryan Times 4 March 1972.
Phillips, Kevin P. 1972b. "How Nixon Will Win." New York Times Magazine 6 August 1972: 8.
Powe, Jr. Lucas A. 2000. The Warren Court and American Politics. Cambridge, MA: The Kelknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Pratt, Robert A. 1992. The Color of Their Skin: Education and Race in Richmond, Virginia, 1954–89. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.
"Republican Party Platform of 1972." americanpresidency.org.
"Republican Party Platform of 1976." americanpresidency.org.
Romney, Mitt. 2012. "Values: Abortion." nowcomment.com.
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1992. "Judicial Independence and the Reality of Political Power." Review of Politics 54: 391. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670500018222
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rouse, Frank. 1997. "Interview." Raleigh News & Observer 6 July 1997. sohp.org.
Ryan, John Barry, and Caitlin Milazzo. 2014. "The South, the Suburbs, and the Vatican Too: Explaining Partisan Change Among Catholics." Political Behavior.
Scalia, Antonin. 1998. A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Schick, Allen. 1982. "How the Budget Was Won and Lost." In President and Congress: Assessing Reagan's First Year, ed. Norman J. Ornstein, Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
Segretti, Donald H. 1973. "Testimony before U.S. Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities." 3 October 1973.
Skowronek, Stephen. 2011. Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Taylor, Steven J. L. 1998. Desegregation in Boston and Buffalo: The Influence of Local Leaders. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Theoharis, Jeanne F. 2001. "'We Saved the City': Black Struggles for Educational Equality in Boston, 1960–1976." Radical History Review. 81: 61–93. https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-2001-81-61
Tushnet, Mark V. 1993. The Warren Court in Historical and Political Perspective. Charlottesville, VA: The University of Virginia Press.
Warren, Earl. 1977. The Memoirs of Chief Justice Earl Warren. New York: Doubleday.
Whittington, Keith E. 2005. "'Interpose Your Friendly Hand': Political Supports for the Exercise of Judicial Review by the United States Supreme Court." American Political Science Review 99: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055405051890
Williams, Daniel K. 2010. God's Own Party: The Making of the Christian Right (Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195340846.001.0001
Woods, Jeff. 2004. Black Struggle, Red Scare: Segregation and Anti-Communism in the South, 1948–1968. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Press.
Copyright (c) 2016 Dave Bridge
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.