首页 > 最新文献

New Political Science最新文献

英文 中文
Should Progressives Fight or Welcome the Republican Effort to Call a Constitutional Convention? 进步派应该反对还是欢迎共和党召开制宪会议的努力?
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2203057
W. Niemi
Abstract Recently published, Senator Russ Feingold and Stanford scholar Peter Prindiville’s, The Constitution in Jeopardy: An Unprecedented Effort to Rewrite Our Fundamental Law and What We Can Do About it, criticizes a current Republican effort to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. This paper argues that progressives, like these authors, and defenders of democracy are mistaken to defend the status quo of the U.S. Constitution. Rather, while the political stakes are certainly high, the effort to create a constitutional convention may be an opportunity for U.S. citizens across the spectrum to engage in constitutional politics aimed at altering the Constitution. A fully engaged citizenry and political elite—rather than one political side in a politically polarized society—would be healthier for the future of a successful modern democracy. This essay will engage Feingold and Prindiville‘s challenging argument opposing the Republican effort to call a constitutional convention under Article V which states that Congress, “on the application of legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments.” Roughly 20 states of the 34 required have passed such resolutions. While there are 27 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Article V has never been used to call a convention. A second aim of the essay is to review the democratic critique of the Constitution, and argue that democratic reform is urgently needed. From the perspective of effective modern democracy, the goal of constitutional change should be seen as imperative: consideration should be given to alter the counter-majoritarian and unrepresentative features of the Constitution. These counter-majoritarian constraints in the U.S. Constitution are an institutional cause of “American Exceptionalism:” why is the United States more libertarian, with only a weak social democratic tradition, and always challenged to create efficient and representative policies? In short, I will argue that progressives must win the battle for democracy and make efforts to reform the Constitution.
摘要最近出版的参议员Russ Feingold和斯坦福大学学者Peter Prindiville的《危险中的宪法:重写我们的基本法的前所未有的努力以及我们能做些什么》批评了共和党目前根据美国宪法第五条召开制宪会议的努力。本文认为,像这些作者一样的进步派和民主捍卫者错误地捍卫了美国宪法的现状。相反,尽管政治风险肯定很高,但创建制宪会议的努力可能是美国公民参与旨在修改宪法的宪法政治的机会。一个充分参与的公民和政治精英——而不是政治两极分化社会中的一方——对一个成功的现代民主的未来来说会更健康。这篇文章将涉及Feingold和Prindiville的挑战性论点,他们反对共和党根据第五条召开制宪会议的努力,该条规定,国会“应根据几个州中三分之二的立法机构的申请,召开制宪会议提出修正案。”在所需的34个州中,大约有20个州通过了此类决议。虽然美国宪法有27项修正案,但第五条从未被用来召集大会。本文的第二个目的是回顾对宪法的民主批判,并认为民主改革是迫切需要的。从有效的现代民主的角度来看,宪法改革的目标应该被视为势在必行:应该考虑改变宪法的反多数和不具代表性的特征。美国宪法中的这些反多数主义限制是“美国例外主义”的制度原因:为什么美国更自由主义,只有薄弱的社会民主传统,并且总是面临制定有效和有代表性的政策的挑战?简言之,我认为进步派必须赢得民主之战,并努力改革宪法。
{"title":"Should Progressives Fight or Welcome the Republican Effort to Call a Constitutional Convention?","authors":"W. Niemi","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2203057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2203057","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recently published, Senator Russ Feingold and Stanford scholar Peter Prindiville’s, The Constitution in Jeopardy: An Unprecedented Effort to Rewrite Our Fundamental Law and What We Can Do About it, criticizes a current Republican effort to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. This paper argues that progressives, like these authors, and defenders of democracy are mistaken to defend the status quo of the U.S. Constitution. Rather, while the political stakes are certainly high, the effort to create a constitutional convention may be an opportunity for U.S. citizens across the spectrum to engage in constitutional politics aimed at altering the Constitution. A fully engaged citizenry and political elite—rather than one political side in a politically polarized society—would be healthier for the future of a successful modern democracy. This essay will engage Feingold and Prindiville‘s challenging argument opposing the Republican effort to call a constitutional convention under Article V which states that Congress, “on the application of legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments.” Roughly 20 states of the 34 required have passed such resolutions. While there are 27 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Article V has never been used to call a convention. A second aim of the essay is to review the democratic critique of the Constitution, and argue that democratic reform is urgently needed. From the perspective of effective modern democracy, the goal of constitutional change should be seen as imperative: consideration should be given to alter the counter-majoritarian and unrepresentative features of the Constitution. These counter-majoritarian constraints in the U.S. Constitution are an institutional cause of “American Exceptionalism:” why is the United States more libertarian, with only a weak social democratic tradition, and always challenged to create efficient and representative policies? In short, I will argue that progressives must win the battle for democracy and make efforts to reform the Constitution.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"380 - 404"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42635151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Hijacking the Agenda: Economic Power and Political Influence, 劫持议程:经济实力和政治影响
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2205294
Joseph G. Peschek
{"title":"Hijacking the Agenda: Economic Power and Political Influence,","authors":"Joseph G. Peschek","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2205294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2205294","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"414 - 416"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41808906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
The Democratic Difficulties of Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta 俄克拉荷马州诉卡斯特罗-韦尔塔案的民主党困境
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2203056
K. Carlson
Abstract The Supreme Court, some commentators argue, is at its most undemocratic since the Lochner Era in the 1930s. They point to the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which departs from public opinion on abortion and longstanding constitutional precedence. Dobbs, however, is not an outlier. The Supreme Court made a similar move in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta. The majority opinion questioned almost 200 years of constitutional interpretation and several decades of congressional policy to enable state governments to exercise criminal authority over non-Indians in Indian Country. This article compares the majority opinion in Castro-Huerta to congressional policy to explore the democratic and constitutional difficulties that can arise when the Supreme Court refuses to defer to Congress—the democratically elected and constitutionally appointed institution for making federal Indian policy. It reveals how the Court’s undemocratic turn extends beyond cases involving individual rights.
摘要一些评论家认为,最高法院是自20世纪30年代洛奇纳时代以来最不民主的法院。他们指出,最高法院在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案中的多数意见偏离了公众对堕胎和长期宪法优先权的看法。然而,多布斯并不是一个异类。最高法院在俄克拉荷马州诉卡斯特罗·韦尔塔案中也采取了类似的行动。多数意见对近200人提出质疑 多年的宪法解释和几十年的国会政策,使邦政府能够对印度国家的非印度人行使刑事权力。本文将Castro Huerta的多数意见与国会政策进行了比较,以探讨当最高法院拒绝服从国会时可能出现的民主和宪法困难。国会是制定印度联邦政策的民主选举和宪法任命的机构。它揭示了最高法院的不民主转向如何超越涉及个人权利的案件。
{"title":"The Democratic Difficulties of Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta","authors":"K. Carlson","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2203056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2203056","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Supreme Court, some commentators argue, is at its most undemocratic since the Lochner Era in the 1930s. They point to the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which departs from public opinion on abortion and longstanding constitutional precedence. Dobbs, however, is not an outlier. The Supreme Court made a similar move in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta. The majority opinion questioned almost 200 years of constitutional interpretation and several decades of congressional policy to enable state governments to exercise criminal authority over non-Indians in Indian Country. This article compares the majority opinion in Castro-Huerta to congressional policy to explore the democratic and constitutional difficulties that can arise when the Supreme Court refuses to defer to Congress—the democratically elected and constitutionally appointed institution for making federal Indian policy. It reveals how the Court’s undemocratic turn extends beyond cases involving individual rights.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"239 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49047052","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Democracy without Shortcuts: A Participatory Conception of Deliberative Democracy, 没有捷径的民主:协商民主的参与性概念,
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2205313
Hayley Elszasz
Christina Lafont’s Democracy without Shortcuts intervenes in a vital and active area of research that seeks to guide how we, as scholars and citizens, should navigate the democratic deficit plaguing many parts of the globe. This book sets out to evaluate scholarly proposals to revitalize democracy, and concludes that the most promising avenue is participatory deliberative democracy: a macro-deliberative strategy with institutional mechanisms for citizens to seek justification for the laws to which they are subject. I was increasingly excited about the book as it proceeded from identifying deficiencies in alternative approaches to democracy towards fleshing out Lafont’s positive vision of what deliberative and participatory forms can offer. The section of the book that I found most compelling was the one in which Lafont evaluates the utility of deliberative minipublics (deliberation amongst a random, “representative” selection of the population), due to this section’s relevance to debates around using minipublics to intervene on pressing and existential issues like climate change. Climate change evokes the tensions between strengthening democracy and passing more stringent policy; scholars have debated the conditions under which democratic practice itself holds climate action back. However, deliberative processes like minipublics have demonstrated promise in producing stronger climate policy proposals than their governments had in place prior. After residents propose policies aligned with their priorities, minipublics often face barriers holding governmental bodies to account on implementation. Here, Lafont points to another critical shortcoming of minipublics: as deliberative participants increase their access to information and debate, their views shift farther away from those of the average citizen. One of the benefits of minipublics from a climate legislation perspective—the fact that they may cause people to change their minds often in favor
克里斯蒂娜·拉丰的《没有捷径的民主》介入了一个重要而活跃的研究领域,旨在指导我们作为学者和公民如何应对困扰全球许多地区的民主赤字。本书旨在评估振兴民主的学术建议,并得出结论,最有希望的途径是参与式协商民主:一种宏观协商战略,具有体制机制,公民可以为他们所受的法律寻求正当性。我对这本书越来越兴奋,因为它从发现民主替代方法的不足,到充实拉丰对审议和参与形式所能提供的积极愿景。我觉得这本书中最有说服力的部分是拉丰评估深思熟虑的小公众(在随机的、“有代表性”的人群中进行深思熟虑)的效用,因为这一部分与利用小公众干预气候变化等紧迫和生存问题的辩论有关。气候变化引发了加强民主和通过更严格政策之间的紧张关系;学者们就民主实践本身阻碍气候行动的条件展开了辩论。然而,像小型公众这样的审议程序在提出比政府之前更强有力的气候政策建议方面表现出了希望。在居民提出与他们的优先事项相一致的政策后,小型公众往往面临着让政府机构对实施负责的障碍。在这里,拉丰指出了小型公众的另一个关键缺点:随着深思熟虑的参与者增加了获得信息和辩论的机会,他们的观点与普通公民的观点发生了进一步的偏离。从气候立法的角度来看,小型公众的好处之一是,他们可能会让人们改变主意,往往倾向于
{"title":"Democracy without Shortcuts: A Participatory Conception of Deliberative Democracy,","authors":"Hayley Elszasz","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2205313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2205313","url":null,"abstract":"Christina Lafont’s Democracy without Shortcuts intervenes in a vital and active area of research that seeks to guide how we, as scholars and citizens, should navigate the democratic deficit plaguing many parts of the globe. This book sets out to evaluate scholarly proposals to revitalize democracy, and concludes that the most promising avenue is participatory deliberative democracy: a macro-deliberative strategy with institutional mechanisms for citizens to seek justification for the laws to which they are subject. I was increasingly excited about the book as it proceeded from identifying deficiencies in alternative approaches to democracy towards fleshing out Lafont’s positive vision of what deliberative and participatory forms can offer. The section of the book that I found most compelling was the one in which Lafont evaluates the utility of deliberative minipublics (deliberation amongst a random, “representative” selection of the population), due to this section’s relevance to debates around using minipublics to intervene on pressing and existential issues like climate change. Climate change evokes the tensions between strengthening democracy and passing more stringent policy; scholars have debated the conditions under which democratic practice itself holds climate action back. However, deliberative processes like minipublics have demonstrated promise in producing stronger climate policy proposals than their governments had in place prior. After residents propose policies aligned with their priorities, minipublics often face barriers holding governmental bodies to account on implementation. Here, Lafont points to another critical shortcoming of minipublics: as deliberative participants increase their access to information and debate, their views shift farther away from those of the average citizen. One of the benefits of minipublics from a climate legislation perspective—the fact that they may cause people to change their minds often in favor","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"416 - 418"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49164879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
We the People and America’s Constitutional Crisis: Introduction to the Special Issue 《我们人民与美国的宪法危机》特刊简介
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2205288
C. Daum
Abstract A majority of Americans agree that our democracy is at risk, but they disagree about the location of these threats. This article examines how debates about who constitutes the “we the people” seeded a politics of resentment that raised the saliency of the many antidemocratic tendencies and institutional features of the American political system. As the American electorate becomes more diverse, questions about whose voices, histories and votes should count have become increasingly fraught, and Donald Trump’s presidency exacerbated these tensions. The growing political divide and the public’s increased awareness of and attention to the anti-democratic features of our political system are pushing us closer to a political precipice as a minority of Americans seek to maximize their power at the expense of an increasingly frustrated majority. This is problematic in a democracy where confidence in the system requires individuals to believe that their participation matters and counts.
大多数美国人都认为我们的民主正处于危险之中,但他们对这些威胁的位置持不同意见。本文考察了关于谁构成了“我们人民”的争论是如何播下了一种怨恨政治的种子,这种怨恨政治引发了美国政治体系中许多反民主倾向和制度特征的突出。随着美国选民变得更加多样化,关于谁的声音、历史和选票应该起作用的问题变得越来越令人担忧,而唐纳德·特朗普的总统任期加剧了这些紧张关系。不断扩大的政治分歧,以及公众对我们政治制度中反民主特征的认识和关注的增加,正把我们推向政治悬崖,因为少数美国人寻求以牺牲日益沮丧的多数人为代价,最大化他们的权力。这在一个民主国家是有问题的,因为对制度的信心要求个人相信他们的参与是重要的和重要的。
{"title":"We the People and America’s Constitutional Crisis: Introduction to the Special Issue","authors":"C. Daum","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2205288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2205288","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A majority of Americans agree that our democracy is at risk, but they disagree about the location of these threats. This article examines how debates about who constitutes the “we the people” seeded a politics of resentment that raised the saliency of the many antidemocratic tendencies and institutional features of the American political system. As the American electorate becomes more diverse, questions about whose voices, histories and votes should count have become increasingly fraught, and Donald Trump’s presidency exacerbated these tensions. The growing political divide and the public’s increased awareness of and attention to the anti-democratic features of our political system are pushing us closer to a political precipice as a minority of Americans seek to maximize their power at the expense of an increasingly frustrated majority. This is problematic in a democracy where confidence in the system requires individuals to believe that their participation matters and counts.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"207 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48454740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
One Accident, One Mistake: Evangelicals, Religious Establishment, and American Political Development 一个意外,一个错误:福音派,宗教机构和美国政治发展
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2203058
H. Hirsch
Abstract It is widely conceded that the Supreme Court has struggled to create a coherent, consistent set of principles on which to base its decisions about the relationship between Church and State. This paper argues that what would help bring conceptual clarity to this contentious set of issues is a historically informed theory that can be labeled developmental, or structural. It presents such a theory by examining two sets of facts: First, a fact that most constitutional scholars have overlooked–that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were drafted and ratified during a period of relative religious calm in between periods of great evangelical fervor, namely the First and Second Great Awakenings (the “accident”). Second, as is well known, that the framers did not foresee the development of stable political parties (the “mistake”). This essay first briefly summarizes the state of the law in this area, and then examines the ways in which the Second Great Awakening combined this accident and this mistake to transform American culture and politics, including electoral politics, and the implications of that transformation.
人们普遍认为,最高法院一直在努力创造一套连贯一致的原则,以此来决定教会与国家之间的关系。本文认为,有助于为这一系列有争议的问题带来概念清晰度的是一种历史知识理论,可以标记为发展或结构。它通过考察两组事实来提出这样一个理论:首先,大多数宪法学者都忽略了一个事实——宪法和权利法案是在福音派狂热时期之间的宗教相对平静的时期起草和批准的,即第一次和第二次大觉醒(“意外”)。其次,众所周知,制宪者没有预见到稳定政党的发展(这是“错误”)。本文首先简要总结了这一领域的法律现状,然后考察了第二次大觉醒是如何结合这一偶然事件和这一错误来改变美国文化和政治的,包括选举政治,以及这种转变的含义。
{"title":"One Accident, One Mistake: Evangelicals, Religious Establishment, and American Political Development","authors":"H. Hirsch","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2203058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2203058","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is widely conceded that the Supreme Court has struggled to create a coherent, consistent set of principles on which to base its decisions about the relationship between Church and State. This paper argues that what would help bring conceptual clarity to this contentious set of issues is a historically informed theory that can be labeled developmental, or structural. It presents such a theory by examining two sets of facts: First, a fact that most constitutional scholars have overlooked–that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were drafted and ratified during a period of relative religious calm in between periods of great evangelical fervor, namely the First and Second Great Awakenings (the “accident”). Second, as is well known, that the framers did not foresee the development of stable political parties (the “mistake”). This essay first briefly summarizes the state of the law in this area, and then examines the ways in which the Second Great Awakening combined this accident and this mistake to transform American culture and politics, including electoral politics, and the implications of that transformation.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"306 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45685424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Asymmetric Territorial Citizenship 非对称领土公民身份
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2203059
J. Lluch
Abstract Many forms of differentiated citizenship have been implemented by states in different regions and epochs. This article presents a novel category: “asymmetric territorial citizenship,” which is a type of differentiation that within the same state establishes categories of citizenship, some of which are fragmentary or inferior, and thus essentially creating horizontal categories of territorialized state membership, or territorialized citizenship regimes. The existence of asymmetry within the same state shatters the commonplace expectation that citizenship is unitary, equal, and homogenous. Empirically, asymmetric citizenship originates in the practices and policies of imperial powers in some of their territories and in the relations of domination and control of colonialism. But, asymmetric citizenship also exists today in the U.S unincorporated territories (and, in particular, in Puerto Rico). I examine the creation of this novel category by the Insular Cases and its progeny, and relate it to the fundamental elements of citizenship.
国家在不同地区、不同时代实行了多种形式的差别化公民权。本文提出了一个新的范畴:“不对称领土公民”,这是一种分化,在同一个国家内建立了公民的类别,其中一些是零碎的或劣等的,从而本质上创造了领土化国家成员或领土化公民制度的水平类别。同一国家内部不对称的存在打破了公民身份是统一、平等和同质的普遍期望。从经验上看,不对称的公民身份起源于帝国主义列强在其部分领土上的做法和政策,以及殖民主义的统治和控制关系。但是,今天在美国未合并领土(特别是波多黎各)也存在不对称的公民身份。我考察了《孤岛案例》及其后续作品对这一小说类别的创造,并将其与公民身份的基本要素联系起来。
{"title":"Asymmetric Territorial Citizenship","authors":"J. Lluch","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2203059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2203059","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many forms of differentiated citizenship have been implemented by states in different regions and epochs. This article presents a novel category: “asymmetric territorial citizenship,” which is a type of differentiation that within the same state establishes categories of citizenship, some of which are fragmentary or inferior, and thus essentially creating horizontal categories of territorialized state membership, or territorialized citizenship regimes. The existence of asymmetry within the same state shatters the commonplace expectation that citizenship is unitary, equal, and homogenous. Empirically, asymmetric citizenship originates in the practices and policies of imperial powers in some of their territories and in the relations of domination and control of colonialism. But, asymmetric citizenship also exists today in the U.S unincorporated territories (and, in particular, in Puerto Rico). I examine the creation of this novel category by the Insular Cases and its progeny, and relate it to the fundamental elements of citizenship.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"288 - 305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46715146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The United Nations as Leviathan: Global Governance in the Post-American World 作为利维坦的联合国:后美国世界的全球治理
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2205321
J. Patrick
Klimat is not a highly-detailed or technical description of the processes of climate change as they affect Russia. It clearly analyses the current and likely future economic effects of global mean temperature increase on Russia’s economic growth model. The book is a useful, well-done summary of a set of political-economic issues from an elite perspective. The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 can be seen as a consequence of the dynamics and dilemmas outlined in the book. If Russia were ever to recover the industrial and agricultural resources of Ukraine, which it arguably needs to emerge from the growth trap Gustafson has delineated, it needed to act before global events, including climate change, made it absolutely impossible for it to do so. But the failure of the gamble that the conquest could be accomplished rapidly and at low cost will hasten and intensify the economic consequences of the exhaustion of the hydrocarbon export model on which the Putin era has depended.
克里马特对影响俄罗斯的气候变化过程没有非常详细或技术性的描述。它清楚地分析了全球平均气温上升对俄罗斯经济增长模式的当前和可能的未来经济影响。这本书从精英的角度对一系列政治经济问题进行了有益的总结,做得很好。俄罗斯在2022年2月对乌克兰的全面入侵可以被视为书中概述的动态和困境的结果。如果俄罗斯想要恢复乌克兰的工业和农业资源,它需要摆脱古斯塔夫森所描述的增长陷阱,那么它需要在气候变化等全球事件使其完全不可能这样做之前采取行动。但是,这场押注能够以低成本快速完成征服的赌博的失败,将加速并加剧普京时代所依赖的碳氢化合物出口模式枯竭的经济后果。
{"title":"The United Nations as Leviathan: Global Governance in the Post-American World","authors":"J. Patrick","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2205321","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2205321","url":null,"abstract":"Klimat is not a highly-detailed or technical description of the processes of climate change as they affect Russia. It clearly analyses the current and likely future economic effects of global mean temperature increase on Russia’s economic growth model. The book is a useful, well-done summary of a set of political-economic issues from an elite perspective. The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 can be seen as a consequence of the dynamics and dilemmas outlined in the book. If Russia were ever to recover the industrial and agricultural resources of Ukraine, which it arguably needs to emerge from the growth trap Gustafson has delineated, it needed to act before global events, including climate change, made it absolutely impossible for it to do so. But the failure of the gamble that the conquest could be accomplished rapidly and at low cost will hasten and intensify the economic consequences of the exhaustion of the hydrocarbon export model on which the Putin era has depended.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"422 - 424"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44255559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Roe is Dead, Long Live the Courts: The Role of Courts in a Post-Roe America 罗伊死了,法院万岁:后罗伊时代美国法院的作用
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2203062
L. Jenkins
Abstract Roe v. Wade was overturned in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022. The pro-choice movement, like the pro-life movement after Roe, has suffered a major legal loss after Dobbs and should learn from the pro-life movement’s incrementalist legal strategies to slowly rebuild a constitutional right to abortion. Post-Dobbs, the pro-choice movement should pursue state constitutional level to create state constitutional rights to abortion. However, the pro-choice movement should also pursue incrementalist federal constitutional litigation in “hard cases,” cases where women with life-threatening pregnancy complications are denied abortion care, to rebuild a federal constitutional right to an abortion. While a federal constitutional case for a right to an abortion may not initially translate into legal victories, such arguments can increase public support for the pro-choice movement by reframing abortion as health care and transforming public perceptions of the women who seek abortions.
摘要罗诉韦德案于2022年6月在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案中被推翻。与罗伊案之后的反堕胎运动一样,反堕胎运动在多布斯案之后遭受了重大法律损失,应该学习反堕胎运动的渐进主义法律策略,慢慢重建宪法赋予的堕胎权。在多布斯之后,支持堕胎的运动应该追求州宪法层面,以创造州宪法规定的堕胎权。然而,支持堕胎的运动也应该在“棘手案件”中寻求渐进主义的联邦宪法诉讼,在这些案件中,患有危及生命的妊娠并发症的妇女被拒绝堕胎护理,以重建联邦宪法规定的堕胎权。虽然堕胎权的联邦宪法案例最初可能不会转化为法律上的胜利,但这种论点可以通过将堕胎重新定义为医疗保健和改变公众对寻求堕胎的女性的看法来增加公众对支持堕胎运动的支持。
{"title":"Roe is Dead, Long Live the Courts: The Role of Courts in a Post-Roe America","authors":"L. Jenkins","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2203062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2203062","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Roe v. Wade was overturned in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022. The pro-choice movement, like the pro-life movement after Roe, has suffered a major legal loss after Dobbs and should learn from the pro-life movement’s incrementalist legal strategies to slowly rebuild a constitutional right to abortion. Post-Dobbs, the pro-choice movement should pursue state constitutional level to create state constitutional rights to abortion. However, the pro-choice movement should also pursue incrementalist federal constitutional litigation in “hard cases,” cases where women with life-threatening pregnancy complications are denied abortion care, to rebuild a federal constitutional right to an abortion. While a federal constitutional case for a right to an abortion may not initially translate into legal victories, such arguments can increase public support for the pro-choice movement by reframing abortion as health care and transforming public perceptions of the women who seek abortions.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"264 - 287"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49454547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Considering Constitutional Change: Survey Evidence on Public Attitudes Toward Term Limits for Federal Judges 考虑宪法改革:公众对联邦法官任期限制态度的调查证据
IF 0.6 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI: 10.1080/07393148.2023.2208432
Ryan C. Black, Ryan J. Owens, Patrick C. Wohlfarth
Abstract This article analyzes public attitudes toward replacing lifetime tenure with term limits for federal judges, including U.S. Supreme Court justices. We employ novel data that we collected from a nationwide survey experiment. We find that although partisans are less supportive of proposals from their opponents, the magnitude of this effect is much smaller than one might expect in today’s polarized environment. We also find that a respondent’s support for term limits is a function of his or her subjective ideological agreement with the Supreme Court. Finally, we demonstrate that although support for term limits is generally high, only a modest subset of reform supporters believe that term limits should be a top political priority. These supporters also tend to exhibit weaker levels of support for the rule of law more generally. Taken together, the results contribute to our understanding of an issue of significant importance.
摘要本文分析了公众对联邦法官(包括美国最高法院法官)以任期限制取代终身任期的态度。我们采用了从全国范围的调查实验中收集的新数据。我们发现,尽管党派人士不太支持对手的提议,但在当今两极分化的环境中,这种影响的程度远小于人们的预期。我们还发现,被申请人对任期限制的支持是他或她与最高法院主观意识形态一致的结果。最后,我们证明,尽管对任期限制的支持率普遍很高,但只有一小部分改革支持者认为,任期限制应该是最高政治优先事项。这些支持者对法治的支持程度也往往较低。总之,这些结果有助于我们理解一个具有重大意义的问题。
{"title":"Considering Constitutional Change: Survey Evidence on Public Attitudes Toward Term Limits for Federal Judges","authors":"Ryan C. Black, Ryan J. Owens, Patrick C. Wohlfarth","doi":"10.1080/07393148.2023.2208432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2023.2208432","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article analyzes public attitudes toward replacing lifetime tenure with term limits for federal judges, including U.S. Supreme Court justices. We employ novel data that we collected from a nationwide survey experiment. We find that although partisans are less supportive of proposals from their opponents, the magnitude of this effect is much smaller than one might expect in today’s polarized environment. We also find that a respondent’s support for term limits is a function of his or her subjective ideological agreement with the Supreme Court. Finally, we demonstrate that although support for term limits is generally high, only a modest subset of reform supporters believe that term limits should be a top political priority. These supporters also tend to exhibit weaker levels of support for the rule of law more generally. Taken together, the results contribute to our understanding of an issue of significant importance.","PeriodicalId":46114,"journal":{"name":"New Political Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"335 - 358"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46745879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
New Political Science
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1