The US Supreme Court and the Centralization of Federal Authority

Michael A. Dichio

Description

This book explores the US Supreme Court's impact on the constitutional development of the federal government from the founding era forward. The author's research is based on an original database of several hundred landmark decisions compiled from constitutional law casebooks and treatises published between 1822 and 2010. By rigorously and systematically interpreting these decisions, he determines the extent to which the court advanced and consolidated national governing authority. The result is a portrait of how the high court, regardless of constitutional issue and ideology, persistently expanded the reach and scope of the federal government.
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Introduction

1. Conceptualizing Supreme Court Power

2. Discerning Incremental Changes in Constitutional Development

3. Strengths of the Early American State, 1789–1864

4. Building a Modern National Government, 1865–1932

5. Legal Developments in the Modern American State, 1933–1997

6. Comprehending Supreme Court Influence

Appendix 1 Coding Decisions

Appendix 2 List of Cases in the Data

Appendix 3 List of Constitutional Casebooks Used for Data Collection

Appendix 4 Characteristics of Constitutional Expansion

Notes
References
Index

Sujets

• Constitution
• National
• États-Unis
• Central
• History of the Americas
• Central government
• United States of America
• USA

Informations

• Publié par: State University of New York Press
• Date de parution: 01 novembre 2018
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781438472546
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

T HE US S UPREME C OURT AND THE C ENTRALIZATION OF F EDERAL A UTHORITY
SUNY series in American Constitutionalism

Robert J. Spitzer, editor
T HE US S UPREME C OURT AND THE C ENTRALIZATION OF F EDERAL A UTHORITY
Michael A. Dichio
Published by State University of New York Press, Albany
© 2018 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
www.sunypress.edu
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Dichio, Michael A., 1986– author.
Title: The US Supreme Court and the centralization of federal authority / Michael A. Dichio.
Other titles: U.S. Supreme Court and the centralization of federal authority | United States Supreme Court and the centralization of federal authority
Description: Albany [New York] : State University of New York Press [2018] | Series: SUNY series in American constitutionalism | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018003724 | ISBN 9781438472539 (hardcover : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781438472546 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: United States. Supreme Court—History. | Federal government—United States—History. | Constitutional history—United States.
Classification: LCC KF8742 .D53 2018 | DDC 342.73/042—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018003724
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
To my parents, Anna and Anthony, and
To my grandparents, Michelina and Antonio
Contents
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Introduction Chapter 1 Conceptualizing Supreme Court Power Chapter 2 Discerning Incremental Changes in Constitutional Development Chapter 3 Strengths of the Early American State, 1789–1864 Chapter 4 Building a Modern National Government, 1865–1932 Chapter 5 Legal Developments in the Modern American State, 1933–1997 Chapter 6 Comprehending Supreme Court Influence Appendix 1 Coding Decisions Appendix 2 List of Cases in the Data Appendix 3 List of Constitutional Casebooks Used for Data Collection Appendix 4 Characteristics of Constitutional Expansion
Notes
References
Index
Illustrations
Tables 2.1 Bensel’s Dimensions of Central State Authority 2.2 Constitutional Issue Areas 2.3 Central State Dimensions Frequency of Federal Expansion 3.1 Constitutional Issue by Effect on Federal Authority, 1792–1864 3.2 Frequency of Central State Dimensions, 1792–1864 4.1 Constitutional Issue by Effect on Federal Authority, 1865–1932 4.2 Frequency of the Dimensions of the Central State, 1865–1932 5.1 Constitutional Issue by Effect on Federal Authority, 1933–1997 5.2 Frequency of Dimensions of the Central State, 1933–1997 A.1 Cross-Tabulation of Level of Government Action under Review by Effect on Federal Authority A.2 Cross-Tabulation of Ideology of Decision by Effect on Federal Authority
Figures 1.1 Typology of Judicial Decisions 2.1 Casebook Distribution 2.2 Distribution of Cases Affecting Federal State Authority, 1792–1997 2.3 Effect on Federal Authority by Year, 1792–1997 2.4 Cumulative Frequency of Constitutional Decisions’ Effect on Federal State Authority, 1792–1997 2.5 Federal State Expansion across Historical Eras 2.6 Central State Dimensions and Effect on Federal Authority 2.7 Central State Dimensions and Effect on Federal Authority across Time 2.8 Cumulative Frequency of Citizenship Dimension, 1792–1997 2.9 Cumulative Frequency of Centralization Dimensions 1792–1997 2.10 Constitutional Issues, Early Republic Era, 1789–1828 2.11 Level of Government Action under Review, Early Republic Era 2.12 Constitutional Issues, Jacksonian Era, 1829–1860 2.13 Level of Government Action under Review, Jacksonian Era 2.14 Constitutional Issues, Civil War and Reconstruction Eras, 1861–1876 2.15 Level of Government Action under Review, Civil War and Reconstruction Eras 2.16 Constitutional Issues, Republican Era, 1877–1932 2.17 Level of Government Action under Review, Republican Era 2.18 Constitutional Issues, New Deal and Great Society Eras, 1933–1968 2.19 Level of Government Action under Review, New Deal and Great Society Eras 2.20 Constitutional Issues, Contemporary Era, 1969–1997 2.21 Level of Government Action under Review, Contemporary Era 3.1 Cumulative Frequency of the Effect of Federal Authority, 1792–1864 3.2 The Effect on Federal Authority across Chief Justice Tenures, 1792–1864 3.3 Constitutional Issue Areas and Effect on Federal Authority, 1792–1864 3.4 Most Abundant Constitutional Issues, 1792–1864 4.1 Cumulative Frequency of the Effect of Federal Authority, 1865–1932 4.2 Effect on Federal Authority across Historical Eras, 1865–1932 4.3 Constitutional Issue Areas and Effect on Federal Authority, 1865–1932 4.4 Most Abundant Constitutional Issues, 1865–1932 5.1 Cumulative Frequency of Effect on Federal Authority, 1933–1997 5.2 Effect on Federal Authority across Historical Eras, 1933–1997 5.3 Constitutional Issue Areas and Effect on Federal Authority, 1933–1977 5.4 Most Abundant Constitutional Issues, 1933–1997 A.1 Coding Process Flow Chart A.2 Distribution of Landmark Decisions across Years, 1792–1997 A.3 Effect on Federal Authority by Constitutional Issue, 1792–1997 A.4 Constitutional Issues as a Subset of Centralization A.5 Constitutional Issues as a Subset of Citizenship
Acknowledgments
I’ve long loved reading acknowledgments because they are one of the few places in academic literature where we get to see the author as a person. To see the people and the values the author cherishes and to dedicate a space for humility allows us to recognize that virtually nothing in life—even things that seems like yours, such as a book—are not just your own creation.
This project first began in graduate school at Cornell University, where I was fortunate enough to assemble a committee who provided support, much-needed criticism, and perhaps most importantly, genuine curiosity about my project.
So let me begin by thanking those who contributed most directly to the intellectual development of this project in graduate school. Elizabeth Sanders offered invaluable historical references and incredible attention to the prose while treating me to long lunches and coffee. Her warm and generous guidance has made me a better adviser to my own students. Aziz Rana’s persistent curiosity and excitement over my project renewed my intellectual energy when I struggled the most. Each time we met, I left feeling revived and eager to tackle additional questions—the sign of a gifted adviser. As one of my professors during my undergraduate years at Boston College, Ken Kersch generously agreed to sit on my dissertation committee. This gesture and enormous undertaking is something I don’t think I can ever fully repay. From the beginning, Ken not only took great interest in my research ideas, but took interest in me as a person and as a professional.
Of all these wonderful advisers, however, none were more integral to my development as a scholar than my dissertation chair, Richard Bensel. Richard’s attentiveness to his students is truly extraordinary. He read everything —down to the very last, tiny footnote in this project—and he did it with remarkable speed while still providing extensive commentary. By the end of my time at Cornell, I had only become more amazed at Richard as an adviser and as a scholar.
Richard and Ken, especially, have remained a font of support and an invaluable source of feedback as I developed this project into a book, and I’m so grateful to have them as advisers.
Beyond my dissertation committee, I have had the help of many others. The late Ted Lowi and his John L. Senior Chair of Institutions provided generous support so I could hire four excellent research assistants—Dan Marcus, Eric Silverberg, Malhar Naik, and Julius Kairey. Their help in data collection and coding made this project far more manageable than it would have been otherwise. Early on in graduate school, Ted Lowi and Isaac Kramnick fostered my love for public law and American political thought, and guided me through my public law course of study. Along with Ted and Isaac, Michael Jones-Correa provided invaluable feedback when I first created this project as a dissertation prospectus. While at Cornell, I was also lucky to meet a number of colleagues who offered support along the way—Nolan Bennett, Paul Herron, Desmond Jagmohan, Julianna Koch, Danielle Thomsen, Martha Wilfahrt, and Alexis Walker. Over countless late-night conversations, Jason Hecht and Igor Logvinenko, in particular, provided support and encouragement when I most needed it. I owe a special thanks to Phil Rocco, who read the entire revised manuscript.
While at Fort Lewis College, I have benefited immensely from the collegiality and from spirited discussion with my colleagues, especially Ruth Alminas, Brad Clark, Paul DeBell, Justin McBrayer, Dugald Owen, and Sarah Roberts-Cady. The college’s Faculty Development, especially its chair, Ryan Smith, and the Fort Lewis College Foundation have generously supported my research endeavors. I owe a special thanks to Stacey Sotosky for providing never-ending encouragement and creative p