My article, “Is the Enterprise of the Roberts Courtroom (Nonetheless) Enterprise?” has simply been revealed in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Right here is the summary:
The Roberts courtroom has lengthy been characterised as a “probusiness” courtroom, given the ostensible orientation of the courtroom’s Republican-appointed majority and assumptions that President Trump’s appointments have magnified that orientation. However there are causes to query this characterization. Quantitative analyses usually fail to account for the relative significance of particular person selections, the broader authorized context wherein the courtroom’s selections are made, or the methods wherein selections can alter or depart from preexisting authorized baselines. I present that President Trump’s appointments to the courtroom have pretty persistently voted to restrain the facility of administrative businesses, however they haven’t persistently supported outcomes which might be helpful to enterprise. In circumstances involving state legal guidelines that will fragment or burden nationwide markets, the Roberts courtroom may very well be much less sympathetic to enterprise pursuits than it was previous to Trump’s appointments.
The article is a part of an interdisciplinary symposium edited by Lee Epstein and Rogers M. Smith on “Donald J. Trump, the Supreme Courtroom, and American Constitutionalism.” Different contributors to the symposium embrace Amanda Hollis-Brusky, Charles M. Cameron, Jonathan P. Kastellec, Adam Liptak, Rogers M. Smith, Gillian E. Metzger, Cristina M. Rodríguez, Olatunde Johnson, Terri Peretti, Linda Greenhouse, Vincent Phillip Muñoz, Rebecca L. Brown, Mitu Gulati, Keren Weinshall, and James L. Gibson.
