• Contact

  • Newsletter

  • About us

  • Delivery options

  • Prospero Book Market Podcast

  • Making the Supreme Court: The Politics of Appointments, 1930-2020

    Making the Supreme Court by Cameron, Charles M.; Kastellec, Jonathan P.;

    The Politics of Appointments, 1930-2020

      • GET 10% OFF

      • The discount is only available for 'Alert of Favourite Topics' newsletter recipients.
      • Publisher's listprice GBP 26.99
      • The price is estimated because at the time of ordering we do not know what conversion rates will apply to HUF / product currency when the book arrives. In case HUF is weaker, the price increases slightly, in case HUF is stronger, the price goes lower slightly.

        12 185 Ft (11 605 Ft + 5% VAT)
      • Discount 10% (cc. 1 219 Ft off)
      • Discounted price 10 967 Ft (10 445 Ft + 5% VAT)

    12 185 Ft

    db

    Availability

    Estimated delivery time: In stock at the publisher, but not at Prospero's office. Delivery time approx. 3-5 weeks.
    Not in stock at Prospero.

    Why don't you give exact delivery time?

    Delivery time is estimated on our previous experiences. We give estimations only, because we order from outside Hungary, and the delivery time mainly depends on how quickly the publisher supplies the book. Faster or slower deliveries both happen, but we do our best to supply as quickly as possible.

    Product details:

    • Publisher OUP USA
    • Date of Publication 26 October 2023

    • ISBN 9780197680544
    • Binding Paperback
    • No. of pages504 pages
    • Size 234x157x18 mm
    • Weight 644 g
    • Language English
    • 432

    Categories

    Short description:

    In Making the Supreme Court, Charles M. Cameron and Jonathan P. Kastellec examine 90 years of American political history to show how the growth of federal judicial power from the 1930s onward inspired a multitude of groups struggling to shape judicial policy. As Cameron and Kastellec argue, the result is a new politics aimed squarely at selecting and placing judicial ideologues on the Court. They make the case that this new model gradually transformed how the Court itself operates, turning it into an ideologically driven and polarized branch. Based on rich data and qualitative evidence, Making the Supreme Court provides a sharp lens on the social and political transformations that created a new American politics.

    More

    Long description:

    Appointments to the United States Supreme Court are now central events in American political life. Every vacancy unleashes a bitter struggle between Republicans and Democrats over nominees; and once the seat is filled, new justices typically vote in predictable ways. However, this has not always been the case. As late as the middle of the twentieth century, presidents invested little time and effort in finding and vetting nominees, often selecting personal cronies, who senators briskly confirmed. Media coverage was desultory, public opinion was largely non-existent, and the justices often voted independently and erratically.

    In Making the Supreme Court, Charles M. Cameron and Jonathan P. Kastellec examine 90 years of American political history to show how the growth of federal judicial power from the 1930s onward inspired a multitude of groups struggling to shape judicial policy. Over time, some groups moved beyond lobbying the Court to changing who sits on it. Other groups formed expressly to influence appointments. These activists and organized groups penetrated the national party system so that after about 1980, presidential candidates increasingly pledged to select and confirm nominees who conformed to specific policy and ideological litmus tests. Once in office, these presidents re-shaped the executive selection system to deliver on their promises. Moreover, the selection process for justices turned into media events, often fueled by controversy. As Cameron and Kastellec argue, the result is a new politics aimed squarely at selecting and placing judicial ideologues on the Court. They make the case that this new model gradually transformed how the Court itself operates, turning it into an ideologically driven and polarized branch. Based on rich data and qualitative evidence, Making the Supreme Court provides a sharp lens on the social and political transformations that created a new American politics.

    Making the Supreme Court uses judicial nominees to investigate larger changes in American politics over the last century, enduring questions about the administrative state, political parties, citizens, interest groups, and lobbying-not to mention nettlesome debates about voter rationality, the downstream effects of partisan polarization, and plenty more besides. Keenly perceptive and abundantly inquisitive, Cameron and Kastellec have delivered a tour de force that is sure to have a major impact on our understanding of all of American politics.

    More

    Table of Contents:

    I. What Happened
    Then and Now
    The Party Demands: Party Agendas for the Supreme Court
    Selecting How to Select: Presidents and Organizational Design
    The Candidates for the Court and the Nominees
    Interest Groups
    The Media, co-authored with Leeann Bass and Julian Dean
    Public Opinion
    Decision in the Senate
    II. Why it Happened
    The Logic of Presidential Selection, co-authored with Lauren Mattioli
    What the Public Wanted
    Voting in the Shadow of Accountability: Senators' Confirmation Decisions
    III. How It Matters, and What the Future Holds
    New Politics, New Justices, New Policies: The Courts That Politics Made
    The Future: The Courts that Politics May Make
    What Future Do We Want? Evaluating Judicial Independence
    Conclusion

    More
    0