Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Free Expression and Democracy in AmericaA History$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Stephen M. Feldman

Print publication date: 2008

Print ISBN-13: 9780226240664

Published to Chicago Scholarship Online: March 2013

DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226240749.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM CHICAGO SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.chicago.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright University of Chicago Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in CHSO for personal use.date: 29 May 2020

Pluralist Democracy and Judicial Review

Pluralist Democracy and Judicial Review

Chapter:
(p.349) Chapter 10 Pluralist Democracy and Judicial Review
Source:
Free Expression and Democracy in America
Publisher:
University of Chicago Press
DOI:10.7208/chicago/9780226240749.003.0010

As the nation emerged from World War I, the Supreme Court as well as the rest of the federal judiciary still exercised the power of judicial review in accordance with republican democracy. Courts determined whether governmental actions were either for the common good—and therefore permissible—or for partial or private interests—and therefore impermissible. Such judicial applications of republican democratic principles continued into the mid-1930s for three reasons. First, while the practice of pluralist democracy began to emerge during the early 1930s, the theory did not crystallize until later in the decade. Second, the institutional practice of adjudication, with its emphasis on stare decisis, has a natural reliance on the past, on precedents, on tradition. As such, one would expect the judiciary often to lag behind other institutions when change is afoot. Third, and related to the previous point, federal judges (including Supreme Court justices) receive lifetime appointments. In a time of critical transition, such as the 1930s, many judges would have matured, learned their professional norms, and been appointed to the federal bench during the prior regime. Such judges would be apt to continue applying the principles and doctrines they had become accustomed to earlier in their careers.

Keywords:   Supreme Court, republican democracy, government actions, federal judges

Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.