Judicial Power, checks and balances

In class on Thursday 3.23 I made reference to backlash against the Courts in the 1960s. I would hope, as students of American politics, we would understand contemporary examples -- such as the cover story for Friday's USA Today:

Same Sex Marriage Battles Escalate

Nineteen states have such bans. Most have been adopted since November 2003, when Massachusetts' highest state court said same-sex couples have a right to marry under state law. Massachusetts then became the first state to give marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.

Besides battling over the substance of a right, people battle over decisionmakers' powers. In the January- February 2006 Judicature, Lauren Bell and Kevin Scott have an article, “Policy statements or symbolic politics? Explaining congressional court-limiting attempts.” They report on their efforts at

collecting and analyzing individual-level data on a variety of congressional court-limiting measures introduced by members of the United States House of Representatives between the 93rd and 106th congresses. Inquiry is restricted to the House because the vast majority of court limiting bills originated there (132 during the period of study, as compared with 29 in the Senate). Three hypotheses are tested: that members of Congress introduce court limiting legislation to promote personal and public policy goals, to protect themselves electorally, and to represent their constituents. The findings indicate that more senior members of Congress as well as ideologically more conservative members introduce court-limiting legislation, and such efforts are related to their constituents’ levels of support for the federal judiciary.