Justice Scalia : Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House? / Marriott, Jane.

In: British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 19.05.2017, p. 41-57.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Published

Standard

Justice Scalia : Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House? / Marriott, Jane.

In: British Journal of American Legal Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 19.05.2017, p. 41-57.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Marriott, J 2017, 'Justice Scalia: Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House?', British Journal of American Legal Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 41-57. https://doi.org/10.1515/bjals-2017-0004

APA

Vancouver

Marriott J. Justice Scalia: Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House? British Journal of American Legal Studies. 2017 May 19;6(1):41-57. https://doi.org/10.1515/bjals-2017-0004

Author

Marriott, Jane. / Justice Scalia : Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House?. In: British Journal of American Legal Studies. 2017 ; Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 41-57.

BibTeX

@article{a8ee61b50d054be6a7ed2959af217dcc,
title = "Justice Scalia: Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House?",
abstract = "This paper examines Justice Scalia{\textquoteright}s approach to campaign finance adjudication, in particular his skepticism of legislative motive. Three distinct strands of skepticism are identified: power-grabbing, incumbent-bracing and speech-preventing. As regards democracy Justice Scalia is identified as being caught in definitional dilemma whereby his campaign finance jurisprudence appears to serve a particular vision of democracy, which is, itself, the identifiable creature of his approach to constitutional adjudication. Ultimately, it is argued that, whilst a liberal dose of mistrust of government might well be warranted in cases concerning the devices of democracy, in the task of scrutinising campaign finance regulation and reform, a strong argument emerges for suspicion ofjudicial motives too since there is as much danger to democracy posed by the tenured fox as by the incumbent one. ",
author = "Jane Marriott",
year = "2017",
month = may,
day = "19",
doi = "10.1515/bjals-2017-0004",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "41--57",
journal = "British Journal of American Legal Studies",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Justice Scalia

T2 - Tenured Fox in the Democratic Hen-House?

AU - Marriott, Jane

PY - 2017/5/19

Y1 - 2017/5/19

N2 - This paper examines Justice Scalia’s approach to campaign finance adjudication, in particular his skepticism of legislative motive. Three distinct strands of skepticism are identified: power-grabbing, incumbent-bracing and speech-preventing. As regards democracy Justice Scalia is identified as being caught in definitional dilemma whereby his campaign finance jurisprudence appears to serve a particular vision of democracy, which is, itself, the identifiable creature of his approach to constitutional adjudication. Ultimately, it is argued that, whilst a liberal dose of mistrust of government might well be warranted in cases concerning the devices of democracy, in the task of scrutinising campaign finance regulation and reform, a strong argument emerges for suspicion ofjudicial motives too since there is as much danger to democracy posed by the tenured fox as by the incumbent one.

AB - This paper examines Justice Scalia’s approach to campaign finance adjudication, in particular his skepticism of legislative motive. Three distinct strands of skepticism are identified: power-grabbing, incumbent-bracing and speech-preventing. As regards democracy Justice Scalia is identified as being caught in definitional dilemma whereby his campaign finance jurisprudence appears to serve a particular vision of democracy, which is, itself, the identifiable creature of his approach to constitutional adjudication. Ultimately, it is argued that, whilst a liberal dose of mistrust of government might well be warranted in cases concerning the devices of democracy, in the task of scrutinising campaign finance regulation and reform, a strong argument emerges for suspicion ofjudicial motives too since there is as much danger to democracy posed by the tenured fox as by the incumbent one.

U2 - 10.1515/bjals-2017-0004

DO - 10.1515/bjals-2017-0004

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 41

EP - 57

JO - British Journal of American Legal Studies

JF - British Journal of American Legal Studies

IS - 1

ER -