東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Patterns and Consequences of Elite P...

Stone, Andrew Robert.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary./
作者:	Stone, Andrew Robert.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2021,
面頁冊數:	218 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-02A.
標題:	Political science. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28498042
ISBN:	9798534671742

Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary.
Stone, Andrew Robert.

Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021 - 218 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Harvard University, 2021.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

This dissertation studies one of the defining features of contemporary American politics: how elites introduce politics to discussions of the judiciary. Recent developments in American politics, including highly contentious Supreme Court nominations and attacks on the Court by high-profile political elites, have generated increasing concern about the potential negative consequences of the politicization of the judiciary. Despite the concerns about this behavior, scholarship provides little evidence as to its prevalence or effects. Throughout the dissertation, I investigate the choices and communications political elites make in relation to the judiciary and the consequences of this behavior for the fundamental relationship between the American people and the courts. I draw upon original observational, survey, and experimental data to examine the politicization of the judiciary through a series of perspectives. In the first paper, I investigate how political elites communicate about Supreme Court nominees and the consequences of these communications for evaluations of nominees and the Court as an institution. Drawing upon survey data and a novel dataset of all press releases issued by Senators from sixteen years of Supreme Court nominations, I reveal the political incentives that drive politicization and the polarizing and delegitimizing effects this behavior has on the American public. In the second paper, coauthored with Jon C. Rogowski, we employ a nationally-representative conjoint experiment to study the effect of elite politicization on evaluations of prospective judicial nominees. We find that political contestation polarizes partisans' attitudes toward prospective nominees. In the third paper, I explore how elites communicate about the obstruction of Supreme Court nominees and how this behavior shapes public evaluations of procedural obstruction. I develop a typology of messaging about obstruction, show that Senators' institutional positions are the primary drivers of their decisions to engage in obstruction messaging, and find that messaging about obstruction polarizes constituent attitudes towards its use. Finally, in the fourth paper I further examine the foundations of public attitudes toward obstruction of judicial nominees. I uncover a clear political dimension to mass evaluations of the use of obstruction, show that certain methods of obstruction are less politically feasible than others, and illustrate the electoral implications of this behavior. Taken together, my research illuminates the incentives elites have to involve the courts in political debates, clarifies the representation relationship between elites and their constituents on matters of the judiciary, and illustrates the challenges to preserving judicial legitimacy in a polarized era.

ISBN: 9798534671742Subjects--Topical Terms:

528916
Political science.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Elites

Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary.
LDR:03950nmm a2200373 4500 001 2284930
005 20211124093256.5
008 220723s2021 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798534671742
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28498042
035 $a AAI28498042
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Stone, Andrew Robert. $0 (orcid)0000-0003-4683-8119 $3 3564148
245 1 0 $a Patterns and Consequences of Elite Politicization of the American Judiciary.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2021
300 $a 218 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Ansolabehere, Stephen D.;Rogowski, Jon C.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Harvard University, 2021.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a This dissertation studies one of the defining features of contemporary American politics: how elites introduce politics to discussions of the judiciary. Recent developments in American politics, including highly contentious Supreme Court nominations and attacks on the Court by high-profile political elites, have generated increasing concern about the potential negative consequences of the politicization of the judiciary. Despite the concerns about this behavior, scholarship provides little evidence as to its prevalence or effects. Throughout the dissertation, I investigate the choices and communications political elites make in relation to the judiciary and the consequences of this behavior for the fundamental relationship between the American people and the courts. I draw upon original observational, survey, and experimental data to examine the politicization of the judiciary through a series of perspectives. In the first paper, I investigate how political elites communicate about Supreme Court nominees and the consequences of these communications for evaluations of nominees and the Court as an institution. Drawing upon survey data and a novel dataset of all press releases issued by Senators from sixteen years of Supreme Court nominations, I reveal the political incentives that drive politicization and the polarizing and delegitimizing effects this behavior has on the American public. In the second paper, coauthored with Jon C. Rogowski, we employ a nationally-representative conjoint experiment to study the effect of elite politicization on evaluations of prospective judicial nominees. We find that political contestation polarizes partisans' attitudes toward prospective nominees. In the third paper, I explore how elites communicate about the obstruction of Supreme Court nominees and how this behavior shapes public evaluations of procedural obstruction. I develop a typology of messaging about obstruction, show that Senators' institutional positions are the primary drivers of their decisions to engage in obstruction messaging, and find that messaging about obstruction polarizes constituent attitudes towards its use. Finally, in the fourth paper I further examine the foundations of public attitudes toward obstruction of judicial nominees. I uncover a clear political dimension to mass evaluations of the use of obstruction, show that certain methods of obstruction are less politically feasible than others, and illustrate the electoral implications of this behavior. Taken together, my research illuminates the incentives elites have to involve the courts in political debates, clarifies the representation relationship between elites and their constituents on matters of the judiciary, and illustrates the challenges to preserving judicial legitimacy in a polarized era.
590 $a School code: 0084.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Law enforcement. $3 607408
650 4 $a Primaries & caucuses. $3 3562102
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 516647
650 4 $a Nominations. $3 3564149
650 4 $a Hearings & confirmations. $3 3564150
650 4 $a Datasets. $3 3541416
650 4 $a Legitimacy. $3 3564151
650 4 $a Communication. $3 524709
650 4 $a Filibusters. $3 3564152
650 4 $a Political parties. $3 516328
650 4 $a Presidents. $2 fast $3 625545
650 4 $a Political power. $3 3544642
650 4 $a Attitudes. $3 1973410
650 4 $a Judiciary. $3 3562072
650 4 $a Media coverage. $3 3564153
653 $a Elites
653 $a Judiciary
653 $a Polarization
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0206
690 $a 0459
710 2 $a Harvard University. $b Government. $3 2098260
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-02A.
790 $a 0084
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2021
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28498042