State Courts, State Legislatures, and Setting Abortion Policy

被引:6
作者
Kim, Jeong Hyun [1 ]
Gunderson, Anna [2 ]
Lane, Elizabeth A. [2 ]
Bauer, Nichole M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Yonsei Univ, Dept Polit Sci & Int Studies, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Louisiana State Univ, Polit Sci, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
[3] Louisiana State Univ, Polit Commun, Baton Rouge, LA USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Roe v. Wade; abortion rights; state courts; politics; SUPREME-COURT; DEATH-PENALTY; JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE; PUBLIC-OPINION; ACCOUNTABILITY;
D O I
10.1215/03616878-10449887
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court decided in Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization (597 U.S. (2022)) to overturn the constitutional right to abortion, a seismic shift in abortion policy that makes the states key battlegrounds in fights over abortion and broader reproductive rights. This article focuses on the role of state supreme courts in setting state abortion policies. Using an original data set of state court decisions surrounding abortion from the past 20 years, the authors investigate how two overarching factors affect state supreme court decision-making on abortion. First, they track how states' political environments affect the decisions courts make about access to abortion. Second, the authors consider the scope of the abortion policy considered by the courts. The authors find that the partisan makeup of state legislatures does not influence the direction of state supreme courts' rulings on abortion issues, but it does affect the scope of abortion regulation being considered by the courts. Additionally, they find that elected judges tend to be more responsive to constituent preferences when ruling on abortion policies. Overall, these findings illustrate the multifaceted dynamics involved in state supreme courts' rulings on abortion.
引用
收藏
页码:569 / 592
页数:24
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   Abortion: Evidence of an issue evolution [J].
Adams, GD .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1997, 41 (03) :718-737
[2]   From Statehouse to Courthouse: Legislative Professionalism and High Court Auditing Behavior [J].
Armaly, Miles T. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 2020, 101 (01) :362-375
[3]   The Influence of Public Sentiment on Supreme Court Opinion Clarity [J].
Black, Ryan C. ;
Owens, Ryan J. ;
Wedeking, Justin ;
Wohlfarth, Patrick C. .
LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW, 2016, 50 (03) :703-732
[4]  
Black RyanC., 2016, US Supreme Court Opinions and their Audiences
[5]   Court Curbing in the State House: Why State Legislators Attack Their Courts [J].
Blackley, Keith .
JUSTICE SYSTEM JOURNAL, 2019, :269-285
[6]   A Common-Space Measure of State Supreme Court Ideology [J].
Bonica, Adam ;
Woodruff, Michael J. .
JOURNAL OF LAW ECONOMICS & ORGANIZATION, 2015, 31 (03) :472-498
[7]  
Bonica Adam, 2012, State Supreme Court Ideology and 'New Style' Judicial Campaigns, DOI [10.2139/ssrn.2169664, DOI 10.2139/SSRN.2169664]
[8]   State public opinion, the death penalty, and the practice of electing judges [J].
Brace, Paul ;
Boyea, Brent D. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2008, 52 (02) :360-372
[9]  
Brace Paul., 2001, State Politics Policy Quarterly, V1, P81, DOI DOI 10.1177/153244000100100106
[10]   Partisan Labels and Democratic Accountability: An Analysis of State Supreme Court Abortion Decisions [J].
Caldarone, Richard P. ;
Canes-Wrone, Brandice ;
Clark, Tom S. .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2009, 71 (02) :560-573