Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Political Research Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Epstein, L.
Right arrow Articles by Knight, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Toward a Strategic Revolution in Judicial Politics: A Look Back, A Look Ahead

Lee Epstein

Jack Knight

Washington University

As papers presented at recent disciplinary conferences and articles published in major political science journals reveal, the field of judicial politics is undergoing a sea change. Variants of the social-psychological paradigm, which have long dominated thinking about law and courts, are giving way to approaches grounded in assumptions in rationality. More to the point, ever-growing numbers of scholars are now invoking the strategic account to understand judicial politics. In what follows, we investigate this "strategic revolution." We begin by providing an intellectual history of the field, with special emphasis on why judicial specialists resisted strategic analysis for so long and why they are now (re)turning to it in ever-increasing numbers. Next, we consider the ways that analysts have begun to put the strategic account to work. This is an important task, for debates are already emerging over the "best" way to invoke the account to study judicial politics. We take the position that there is no one "right" way but rather four different approaches-all of which have the potential to provide us with important insights into law and courts.

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 3, 625-661 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/106591290005300309


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Political Research QuarterlyHome page
R. Hirschl
The Realist Turn in Comparative Constitutional Politics
Political Research Quarterly, December 1, 2009; 62(4): 825 - 833.
[PDF]


Home page
Political Research QuarterlyHome page
J. Barnes Bowie and D. R. Songer
Assessing the Applicability of Strategic Theory to Explain Decision Making on the Courts of Appeals
Political Research Quarterly, June 1, 2009; 62(2): 393 - 407.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Politics ResearchHome page
K. R. Nelson and E. M. Ringsmuth
Departures From the Court: The Political Landscape and Institutional Constraints
American Politics Research, May 1, 2009; 37(3): 486 - 507.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Politics ResearchHome page
C. M. King
Strategic Selection of Legal Instruments on the U.S. Supreme Court
American Politics Research, September 1, 2007; 35(5): 621 - 642.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Politics ResearchHome page
S. A. Comparato and S. D. McClurg
A Neo-Institutional Explanation of State Supreme Court Responses in Search and Seizure Cases
American Politics Research, September 1, 2007; 35(5): 726 - 754.
[Abstract] [PDF]