Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:35:12.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing Legislative Deferral

Abortion Policy Making in New York, 1970–2010

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2022

Jonathan F. Parent
Jonathan F. Parent*
Affiliation:
Le Moyne College
*
Contact the author at [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The legislative deferral hypothesis posits that elected policy makers, anxious to avoid the political repercussions of taking clear positions on controversial issues, will actively seek to involve the judiciary in resolving these disputes. This study seeks to further test the legislative deferral theory by considering its applicability to the state level. What is revealed from an examination of the development of abortion policy in New York is that, despite the controversial nature of the issue, lawmakers did not seem to attempt to involve the courts in its resolution, and virtually no policy was created by the state’s judicial branch. I propose an alternative explanation for judicial noninvolvement, borrowing from path-dependence theory, that emphasizes the importance of the initial location of policy change and the issue frames that first took hold around this issue.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Law and Courts , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , Spring 2018 , pp. 25 - 50
Copyright
© 2018 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, A. 2004. “How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism.” International Organization 58 (2): 239–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Al, and Hernandez, Raymond. 2005. “Both Parties Attack Pataki’s Stand on Morning-After Pill.” New York Times, August 2.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jeb, and Burke, Thomas F. 2015. How Policy Shapes Politics: Rights, Courts, Litigation, and the Struggle over Injury Compensation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnum, David G. 1985. “The Supreme Court and Public Opinion: Judicial Decision Making in the Post-New Deal Period.” Journal of Politics 47 (2): 652–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergara, M., Richman, B., and Spiller, P. T.. 2003. “Modeling Supreme Court Strategic Decision Making: The Congressional Constraint.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (2): 247–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonventre, Vincent M. 1992. “State Constitutional Adjudication at the Court of Appeals, 1990 and 1991: Retrenchment Is the Rule.” Albany Law Review 56:119–23.Google Scholar
Bonventre, Vincent M., and Powell, John D. 1994. “Changing Course at the High Court.” Empire State Report 55:55–57.Google Scholar
Brace, Paul, Langer, Laura, and Gann Hall, Melinda. 2000. “Measuring the Preferences of State Supreme Court Judges.” Journal of Politics 62 (2): 387–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandwein, Pamela. 2006. “Studying the Careers of Knowledge Claims: Bringing Science Studies to Legal Studies.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Yanow, Dvora and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, 228–43. New York: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Brandwein, Pamela. 2011. “Law and American Political Development.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 7:187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Charles M., Segal, Jeffrey A., and Songer, Donald R. 2000. “Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy: An Informational Model of the Supreme Court’s Certiorari Decisions.” American Political Science Review 94 (1): 101–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, Hugh. 1976. “Governor’s Memoranda on Bills Vetoed.” New York State Legislative Annual. Albany, NY.Google Scholar
Chutkow, D. M. 2008. “Jurisdiction Stripping: Litigation, Ideology, and Congressional Control of the Courts.” Journal of Politics 70 (4): 1053–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Robert Lowry. 1994. “Game Theory, Legal History, and the Origins of Judicial Review: A Revisionist Analysis of Marbury v. Madison.” American Journal of Political Science 38 (2): 285–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, D. 2011. “Understanding Process Tracing.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (4): 823–30.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Bradley E. 2001. “Implications of FDA Approval of RU-486: Regulating Mifepristone within the Bounds of the Constitution.” Kentucky Law Journal 90:229–50.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1957. “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker.” Journal of Public Law 6:279–95.Google Scholar
Dullea, Georgia. 1976. “Teen-Age Abortions without Family Consent Hang in the Balance.” New York Times, June 22.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Epstein, L., Knight, J., and Martin, A. D.. 2001. “The Supreme Court as a Strategic National Policy Maker.” Emory Law Journal 50 (Spring): 583–611.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Segal, Jeffrey A., and Nicoll Victor, Jennifer. 2002. “Dynamic Agenda Setting on the U.S. Supreme Court: An Empirical Assessment.” Harvard Journal on Legislation 39:395–433.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., Wright, Gerald C., and Mclver, John P. 2007. “Measuring the Public’s Ideological Preferences in the 50 States: Survey Responses versus Roll Call Data.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (2): 141–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, W. E. 1972. “Court of Appeals Upholds State’s ’70 Abortion Law.” New York Times, July 8.Google Scholar
Flemming, Gregory N., Holian, David B., and Mezey, Susan G. 1998. “An Integrated Model of Privacy Decision Making in State Supreme Courts.” American Politics Quarterly 26 (1): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graber, Mark A. 1993. “The Non-majoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary.” Studies in American Political Development 7:35–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhouse, L., and Siegel, R. B.. 2012. Before Roe v. Wade: Voices That Shaped the Abortion Debate before the Supreme Court’s Ruling. http://documents.law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/BeforeRoe2ndEd_1.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greif, A. 1994. “Cultural Beliefs and the Organization of Society: A Historical and Theoretical Reflection on Collectivist and Individual Societies.” Journal of Political Economy 102 (5): 912–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutis, Philip S. 1989. “Albany Pact on Prenatal Care Excludes Abortion.” New York Times, June 30.Google Scholar
Hansford, T. G., and Damore, D. F.. 2000. “Congressional Preferences, Perceptions of Threat, and Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Politics Research 28 (4): 490–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Gardiner. 2009. “FDA Easing Access to ‘Morning After’ Pill.” New York Times, April 22.Google Scholar
Harvey, A., and Friedman, B.. 2006. “The Limits of Judicial Independence: Congressional Constraints on the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Rulings, 1987–2000.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31 (4): 533–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, O. A. 2001. “Path Dependence in the Law: The Course and Pattern of Change in a Common Law Legal System.” Iowa Law Review 86 (2): 1–66.Google Scholar
Hays, Constance L. 1990. “Suit Seeks New Abortion Protection.” New York Times, April 24.Google Scholar
Historical Society of the New York Courts. 2016. “Biographies.” http://www.courts.state.ny.us/history/legal-history-new-york/history-legal-bench-bar.html.Google Scholar
Ignagni, J., and Meernik, J. 1994. “Explaining Congressional Attempts to Reverse Supreme Court Decisions.” Political Research Quarterly 47 (2): 353–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaheny, Erin B., Brodie Haire, Susan, and Benesh, Sara C. 2008. “Change over Tenure: Voting, Variance, and Decision Making on the US Courts of Appeals.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 490–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingdon, John W. 2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Kovach, B. 1970a. “Abortion Reform Approved, 31–26, by State Senate.” New York Times, March 19.Google Scholar
Kovach, B. 1970b. “Abortion Reform Is Voted by the Assembly, 76 to 73: Final Approval Expected.” New York Times, April 10.Google Scholar
Lovell, G. I. 2003. Legislative Deferrals: Statutory Ambiguity, Judicial Power, and American Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maestas, Cherie. 2000. “Professional Legislatures and Ambitious Politicians: Policy Responsiveness of State Institutions.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (4): 663–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, J. 2000. “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology.” Theory and Society 29 (4): 507–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinley, James C. Jr., 2001. “Family Fined in First Ruling Based on State Abortion Clinic Access Law.” New York Times, August 28.Google Scholar
Meislin, Richard J. 1978. “Approval of Budget Is Voted in Albany: Medicaid Abortion Ban Is Defeated after Separation from Bill; Final Part of Budget Is Approved after Bill on Abortion Is Defeated.” New York Times, April 6.Google Scholar
Mishler, William, and Sheehan, Reginald S. 1993. “The Supreme Court as a Countermajoritarian Institution? The Impact of Public Opinion on Supreme Court Decisions.” American Political Science Review 87 (1): 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, W. F. 1962. Congress and the Courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, W. F. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nagourney, Adam. 1998. “Pataki Plans Bill to Protect Abortion Clinics from Harassment.” New York Times, November 20.Google Scholar
North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nossiff, Rosemary. 2001. Before Roe: Abortion Policy in the States. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Novkov, J. 2011. “Legal Archaeology.” Political Research Quarterly 64 (2): 348–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, C. 2008. “US Presidential War Powers: Legacy Chains in Military Intervention Decisionmaking.” Journal of Peace Research 45 (5): 665–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 94 (2): 251–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. 2004. Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, Richard S., and Keck, Thomas M. 2015. “Movement Litigation and Unilateral Disarmament: Abortion and the Right to Die.” Law and Social Inquiry 40 (4): 880–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, G. N. 1992. “Judicial Independence and the Reality of Political Power.” Review of Politics 54 (3): 369–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rule, Sheila. 1978. “Albany Leaders Favor Retention of Medicaid-Financed Abortions.” New York Times, January 31.Google Scholar
Salmore, Barbara G., and Salmore, Stephen A. 2008. New Jersey Politics and Government: The Suburbs Come of Age. New Brunswick, NJ: Rivergate.Google Scholar
Saxon, Wolfgang. 1992. “George Michaels, 80, Legislator Who Changed Abortion Law, Dies.” New York Times, December 5.Google Scholar
Schneier, Edward V., Brian Murtaugh, John, and Pole, Antoinette. 2010. New York Politics: A Tale of Two States. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Segal, J. A., and Spaeth, H. J.. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, J. A., and Westerland, C. 2005. “The Supreme Court, Congress, and Judicial Review.” North Carolina Law Review 83 (5): 1323–52.Google Scholar
Siegel, Reva B. 2010. “Roe’s Roots: The Women’s Rights Claims That Engendered Roe.” Paper no. 1128, Faculty Scholarship Series, Yale Law School.Google Scholar
Smith, M. C. 2008. Political Institutions and Lesbian and Gay Rights in the United States and Canada. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spriggs, James F. II, and Hansford, Thomas G. 2001. “Explaining the Overruling of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent.” Journal of Politics 63 (4): 1091–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, Peverill. 2008. “Measuring the Professionalization of U. S. State Courts of Last Resort.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 8 (3): 223–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanberg, G. 2001. “Legislative-Judicial Relations: A Game-Theoretic Approach to Constitutional Review.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (2): 346–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waggoner, Walter H. 1970. “New Jersey Sued on Abortion Law: Group Including Y.W.C.A. Cites U.S. Constitution.” New York Times, March 6.Google Scholar
Weiden, David L. 2011. “Judicial Politicization, Ideology, and Activism at the High Courts of the United States, Canada, and Australia.” Political Research Quarterly 64 (2): 335–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitman, Christine Todd. 1997. “Veto Message of Assembly Bill No. 2409.” June 23. State of New Jersey, Executive Department.Google Scholar
Whittington, K. 2007. Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Gerald C., Erikson, Robert S., and McIver, John P. 1985. “Measuring State Partisanship and Ideology with Survey Data.” Journal of Politics 47 (2): 469–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zorn, Christopher, and Barnes Bowie, Jennifer. 2010. “Ideological Influences on Decision Making in the Federal Judicial Hierarchy: An Empirical Assessment.” Journal of Politics 72 (4): 1212–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar