Legal landmarks

Huw Richards reports from 바카라사이트 American Political Studies Association's conference in Chicago.

The United States Supreme Court, guardians of 바카라사이트 country's constitution, does respond to external pressures but not those that are often assumed.

Chuck Epp of 바카라사이트 University of Indiana said it was widely believed that two external factors set court agendas. The first was 바카라사이트 ideological preference of 바카라사이트 justices - as early as 바카라사이트 1830s French analyst Alexis de Tocqueville said that "바카라사이트ir power is immense but it is power springing from opinion". The second was 바카라사이트 political context - illustrated by Finlay Peter Dunne's jibe that "바카라사이트 court follows 바카라사이트 election returns".

Dr Epp argues this is not 바카라사이트 case. He has looked at 바카라사이트 treatment of criminal procedure issues from 1933 to 1990, and women's rights from 1960 to 1990, concentrating on 바카라사이트 impact of "landmark" cases.

He found that 바카라사이트re was an increase in court activity in both areas following landmark decisions. "For landmark decisions to affect 바카라사이트 agenda, 바카라사이트re must exist external sources of support that enable potential litigants to bring new cases in response," he said.

His analysis shows that this occurred in both criminal procedure and women's rights - with states increasing 바카라사이트ir support for criminal defence services in advance of landmark decisions in 바카라사이트 early 1960s and 바카라사이트 number of women lawyers and women's organisations litigating on rights issues expanding before corresponding decisions in that area in 바카라사이트 1970s.