This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Term Definition Significance Orderly dispute resolution deciding cases under the rule of law; one of 3 promises of the courts Source of legitimacy: logic of triad Does Adversarial Legalism deliver on the promise of the courts? Relatively poor: too costly for one shotters and too unpredictable for repeat players Correcting political failure making policy in areas other branches are unwilling or unable to address; one of 3 promises of the courts-Sometimes responsive: entrepreneurial lawyers + political judges + high levels of rights consciousness + institutionalized use of the courts following Brown.-BUT courts will tend to act within the broad confines of the dominant cultural framework source of leg: perceived prudence (by elite and public) Correcting market failure addressing market limitations, e.g., common pool problems, externalities; one of 3 promises of the courts some market failures (and laws addressing):-unfair distribution (level paying field)-neg. externalities (internalization of costs)-common pool problems (regulation of resource utilization) Variable: depends on availability of legal resources to one- shotter + nature of problems (e.g., complexity, organizational v. attitudinal change, etc.) + underlying market conditions Source: perceived prudence (b elite and public) Brown v. Board of Education Court ordered segregation of southern schools. Court stepping outside of orderly dispute resolution. Court correcting political failure Court making policy Part of process in which the court shaped the politics of the civil rights movement. Shift towards Entrepreneurial Politics CCV? During civil rights movement. Cultural pressure. Plus could not implement policies w/o congress. DCV: dcontrine and passivity a weak constraint on judicial power. But power of persuasion is a strong constrain on judicial coercion. Adversarial legalism A distinctly American mode of dispute resolution and policy-making that tends to be more complex, costly, punitive, unpredictable and politicize than its counterparts in Western Europe and Japan. Party influenced and Formal a method that feature relatively high degrees of formal legal contestation, litigant activism, and substantive uncertainty. More complex detailed bodies of legal rules More formal adversarial procedures for resolving political and scientific disputes More costly and less accessible. More punitive legal sanctions More frequent judicial intervention More political controversy More legal uncertainty, malleability, and unpredictability Inefficient. 2 dossiers Completely based on rights/defendants have a voice Juries, pol. Appted judges, and entrepreneurial lawyers AL is more dynamic-Doctrinal: AL is formal but vague constitution is an invitation to judicial policy, plus changing law to adapt to current circumstances, plus some statutes are vague and contradictory....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/13/2008 for the course POSC 130g taught by Professor Below during the Spring '06 term at USC.
- Spring '06
- Public Policy