1. The Majoritarian Basis of Judicial Countermajoritarianism.
- Author
-
Rogers, James R. and Ura, Joseph Daniel
- Subjects
- *
JUDICIAL review , *MINORITIES , *LEGISLATIVE bodies , *JUDGES , *CORRUPTION - Abstract
"Prejudice against discrete and insular minorities" is a "special condition" that allows heightened judicial scrutiny of legislation aimed at "particular religious ... national ... or racial minorities" (US v. Carolene Products Co., n.4, 1938). This aspiration, however, leads to a puzzle regarding the ability of judges to protect minorities in separation-of-power systems: Why don't legislative majorities choose to curb courts that prevent the implementation of legislation when those majorities have tools to do so? We argue that judicial protection of minorities emerges as an unintended by-product of majoritarian politics. Popular majorities support judicial review because courts provide protection from corrupt legislatures. This position is supported by evidence from a controlled experiment showing that respondents' evaluations of the Supreme Court relative to Congress are increased by reports of congressional corruption, news of judicial decisions that conform to subjects' preferences, and an interactive effect between these two treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2012