Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Supreme Court Attitudes Toward Federal Administrative Agencies

1960; University of Chicago Press; Volume: 22; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2307/2126894

1468-2508

Joseph Tanenhaus,

Legal Systems and Judicial Processes

Previous articleNext article No AccessSupreme Court Attitudes Toward Federal Administrative AgenciesJoseph TanenhausJoseph Tanenhaus Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Politics Volume 22, Number 3Aug., 1960 Sponsored by the Southern Political Science Association Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/2126894 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 17Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Mark S. Hurwitz Ideology and Deference in U.S. Courts of Appeals Decision Making on Administrative Law, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2006).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.878353Kiki Caruson, J. Michael Bitzer At the Crossroads of Policymaking: Executive Politics, Administrative Action, and Judicial Deference by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals (1985-1996)*, Law Policy 26, no.3-43-4 (Oct 2004): 347–369.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2004.00182.x Martha Anne Humphries , and Donald R. Songer Law and Politics in Judicial Oversight of Federal Administrative Agencies, The Journal of Politics 61, no.11 (Oct 2015): 207–220.https://doi.org/10.2307/2647783John C. Kilvein, Richard A. Brisbin FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY POLICY MAKING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT, Southeastern Political Review 26, no.44 (Nov 2008): 785–801.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.1998.tb00510.xChristopher P. Banks IDEOLOGY AND JUDICIAL DEFERENCE IN THE D.C. CIRCUIT, Southeastern Political Review 26, no.44 (Nov 2008): 861–888.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.1998.tb00513.xReginald S. Sheehan SOLICITOR GENERAL, PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT, AND THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN SUPREME COURT DECISION MAKING, Southeastern Political Review 24, no.11 (Nov 2008): 55–75.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.1996.tb00432.xJames Meernik, Joseph Ignagni Congressional Attacks on Supreme Court Rulings Involving Unconstitutional State Laws, Political Research Quarterly 48, no.11 (Mar 1995): 43–59.https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299504800103Reginald S. Sheehan Federal Agencies and the Supreme Court, American Politics Quarterly 20, no.44 (Nov 2016): 478–500.https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9202000407Reginald S. Sheehan Governmental Litigants, Underdogs, and Civil Liberties: a Reassessment of a Trend in Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Western Political Quarterly 45, no.11 (Sep 2016): 27–39.https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299204500104R. S. Sheehan Administrative Agencies and the Court: a Reexamination of the Impact of Agency Type On Decisional Outcomes, Political Research Quarterly 43, no.44 (Dec 1990): 875–885.https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299004300411Donald W. Crowley Judicial Review of Administrative Agencies: Does the Type of Agency Matter?, Western Political Quarterly 40, no.22 (Sep 2016): 265–283.https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298704000205David H. Willison Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions, American Politics Quarterly 14, no.44 (Nov 2016): 317–327.https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8601400403Donald W. Crowley Selection Tests and Equal Opportunity, Administration & Society 17, no.33 (Jul 2016): 361–384.https://doi.org/10.1177/009539978501700306 S. Sidney Ulmer Governmental Litigants, Underdogs, and Civil Liberties in the Supreme Court: 1903-1968 Terms, The Journal of Politics 47, no.33 (Oct 2015): 899–909.https://doi.org/10.2307/2131216Glendon Schubert The 1960 Term of the Supreme Court: A Psychological Analysis., American Political Science Review 56, no.0101 (Sep 2013): 90–107.https://doi.org/10.2307/1953099David Fellman Constitutional Law in 1959–1960, American Political Science Review 55, no.0101 (Aug 2014): 112–135.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400124220David Fellman Constitutional Law in 1959–1960, American Political Science Review 55, no.11 (Aug 2014): 112–135.https://doi.org/10.2307/1976054