Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Symbolic versus Policy Representation on the U.S. Supreme Court
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Symbolic versus Policy Representation on the U.S. Supreme Court
Do you wish to request the book?
Symbolic versus Policy Representation on the U.S. Supreme Court
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Symbolic versus Policy Representation on the U.S. Supreme Court
1993
Overview
Presidents often pick Supreme Court justices at least in part for their symbolic appeal to geographic, sex, racial, religious, or partisan groups. Whether these symbolic appointees actually represent group attitudes particularly well during their tenure on the Court, however, has not yet been examined. Evidence from 107 rulings during the Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Courts indicates that most symbolic appointees to the Courts do not vote for their own group's attitudes on specific Court cases any more often than do their remaining brethren. Symbolic appointees have not typically been “faithful delegates.”
Publisher
Cambridge University Press,University of Texas Press,University of Texas Press in association with the Southern Political Science Association, etc
