THE REHNQUIST COURT AND JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSERVATIVE HABEAS CORPUS POLICY
William Robert Thomas, Stephen E. Sussman
Abstract
William Robert Thomas, Stephen E. Sussman
Abstract
This paper links the selection of Supreme Court justices to change in federal habeas corpus policy. This change, sought by every Republican president since Richard Nixon, is strongly conservative. It restricts access to federal court by state prisoners seeking redress for alleged violation of Constitutional rights. This research analyzes the judicial selection process after Earl Warren's retirement as Chief Justice. It compares decisions of the Warren, Burger and Rehnquist Courts on habeas corpus questions using descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative doctrinal analysis. The Burger Court was unsuccessful in bringing about conservative change, but the Rehnquist Court, by the early 1990s, had dramatically accomplished its goals. The Rehnquist Court developed much stricter standards for obtaining review in the areas of the abuse of the writ in successor petitions, procedural default and retroactivity of new constitutional rules. The Rehnquist Court's conservative policy was judicially activist in that it overturned precedent and used statutory interpretation to bring about policies rejected by Congress.
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper links the selection of Supreme Court justices to change in federal habeas corpus policy. This change, sought by every Republican president since Richard Nixon, is strongly conservative. It restricts access to federal court by state prisoners seeking redress for alleged violation of Constitutional rights. This research analyzes the judicial selection process after Earl Warren's retirement as Chief Justice. It compares decisions of the Warren, Burger and Rehnquist Courts on habeas corpus questions using descriptive quantitative analysis and qualitative doctrinal analysis. The Burger Court was unsuccessful in bringing about conservative change, but the Rehnquist Court, by the early 1990s, had dramatically accomplished its goals. The Rehnquist Court developed much stricter standards for obtaining review in the areas of the abuse of the writ in successor petitions, procedural default and retroactivity of new constitutional rules. The Rehnquist Court's conservative policy was judicially activist in that it overturned precedent and used statutory interpretation to bring about policies rejected by Congress.
Key concepts: Habeas corpus, Political science, Supreme court, Law, Redress, Statutory interpretation, Writ