A majoritarian basis for judicial countermajoritarianism

5Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

Judicial protection of disfavored minorities against oppressive legislation in majoritarian separation-of-power systems raises a puzzle: Why don’t legislative majorities enacting discriminatory legislation curb judicial power when judges use their power to protect minorities and stymie the legislation? We answer this question by showing that judicial protection of disfavored minorities can emerge as an unintended by-product of majoritarian politics. We develop a model that includes the two aspects of judicial review Alexander Hamilton discusses in The Federalist No. 78: Judicial protection of disfavored minorities against hostile popular majorities, and judicial protection of majority interests against legislative depredation. It is the institutional linkage between these functions that induces popular majorities, within limits, to side with judges against legislatures even when those judges protect minorities that popular majorities want to oppress.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rogers, J. R., & Ura, J. D. (2020). A majoritarian basis for judicial countermajoritarianism. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 32(3), 435–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629820927784

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free