POL SCI/Legal/Policy Research on Court Packing/Unpacking (Essay Sample)

POL SCI/Legal/Policy Research on Court Packing/Unpacking [Student Name] [Institutional Affiliations] [Instructor] [Date] My Research Question: What does the POL SCI/legal/policy research on court packing/unpacking at the state level potentially tell us about what might happen if these changes are implemented at the federal level? Introduction: Court packing and unpacking which is a matter which entails the expansion or reduction of the court size while placing appointments of new justices so as to shift the ideological balance has become a very contentious issue in recent years. Whereas the focus has mainly been on the potential implementation of these changes at the federal level, it is also important to put the lessons which can be drawn from the research on court packing and unpacking into consideration at the level of the state. Through an examination of existing literature in political science, policy and law, this paper aims to answer the empirical question: “What does research on court packing or unpacking at the state level potentially tell us about what might happen in the event such changes are implemented at the federal level?”. In order to address this research question, this paper puts into synthesis and analyzes research which is in existence on court packing and unpacking. Three main themes ensue and they are the focus of this paper: historical and theoretical aspects of judicial law making, the impact of court legitimacy and thirdly the rise of legal liberalism. The first section will delve into the historical and theoretical facets of judicial law making and it will draw on studies such as those done by Kalman (2022) and Durnoy (2020). This section looks into how the packing and the unpacking of the court have been utilized as strategic tools to shape the ideological composition of courts at the state level throughout history. Again, it will examine the theoretical underpinnings of such actions and how they implicate for the rule of law. On the same wavelength, the second section focuses on the impact of court packing/unpacking on legitimacy of the court and also the rise of legal liberalism. This section draws on the works by Levy (2020) and Braver (2019) so as to analyze the effects of such changes on the perception of the public, judicial perception as well as the court ability to serve as an impartial law arbiter. The third section delves into the wider implications of court packing and unpacking on democratic resilience drawing from research works by Lieberman, Mettler, and Roberts (2021) so as to explore how such actions could weaken the democratic institutions and norms as well as the potential consequences for checks and balances as well as separation of powers. Through analysis and synthesis of existing research on court packing/unpacking, the aim of this paper is to give insights into the potential implications upon the implementations of such changes at the federal state. The research findings contribute to the greater understanding of the possible repercussions on judicial application of economic evidence, democratic resilience, legitimacy of the court and judicial independence. Content: Historical and Theoretical Aspects of Judicial Lawmaking The first major issue arising from the literature is the historical and the theoretical aspects of judicial lawmaking in the light of packing and unpacking of courts. According to Durnov (2020), the historical usage of court packing/unpacking have been used as strategic tools in shaping the ideology and the composition of our state courts. The historical analysis reveals that court packing and unpacking has been adopted throughout history for the advancement of specific ideological agendas and also for securing some outcomes as desired by some entities in decisions of the court. Again, in this research, court packing/unpacking has been shown to be a very prevalent and recurrent issue throughout history which contradicts the notion that these are rare occurrences. For instance, court packing happened in 2018 at state level during the controversy hearing of West Virginia Supreme Court appeals where the republican were seen to control the legislature and sought to pursue certain proceedings against several court justices accusing them on unethical behaviors and fiscal improprieties. Again, Kalman (2022) delved into the theoretical underpinnings of packing and unpacking of courts. The author analyses the rationales behind such actions arguing that such actions are a fundamental challenge to the rule of law. Court packing and unpacking entails alterations of court composition so ass to achieve particular goals of policy rather than permitting for judgment which is impartial on legal principles. Such a deviation from the traditional judicial independence and deviations from rule of law brings about concerns as regarding the standards of legal decision-making as well as separation of powers. Additionally, the partisan concept entrenchment posits that political actors could try to pack or unpack the courts in entrenching their own party objectives and party power through friendly judiciary which aligns with their leanings in terms of ideology. Disparities on the manner how justices are brought to power such as legislative processes of confirmation, gubernatorial elections etc tend to be key opportunities for political actors to engage in packing/unpacking court strategies. Taken as a package, the two studies show the theoretical implications and historical usage of court packing and unpacking. The research shows that such actions are potential issues towards undermining the judicial system integrity and the rule of law through an introduction of ideological bias as well as deviation from the ethics of judicial jurisprudence, impartiality and rule of law. Impact on Court Legitimacy and the Rise of Legal Liberalism The literature also examines the impact of court packing and unpacking on the legitimacy of the court as well as the rising of liberalism. Braver (2019) looks into the notion of recurrent court challenges and the assumption which commonly that court packing leads to loss of court legitimacy. On the contrary, Braver argues out that court packing can actually be an enhancer of court legitimacy via alignment to judicial decisions with the changing societal beliefs and values. Further, Levy (2020) explores the concept of court legitimacy by looking into the repercussions of packing and unpacking on the perception of judicial independence and perception of the public. His research shows that court packing and unpacking is a practice that can easily erode away judicial trust since it may be perceived as a partisan strategy for influencing decisions of the court. Such erosion of trust in the courts can actually have long-term implications as pertaining the effectiveness and the legitimacy pf judicial system. Again, the eruption of legal liberalism is a significant aspect in the context of court packing or unpacking. Kalman (2022) and Seligman (2021) are congruent that court packing and unpacking can be perceived as part of the wider trend towards a more politically oriented judicial system. Whereas political actors seek to control and shape courts so as to advance their own agendas on policy, the role of legal liberalism whose emphasis is judicial independence and the rule of law could be diminished. Such a shift towards a more politicized judiciary has got its implications for the impartiality and fairness of decisions of the court. These studies showcase that court packing and unpacking could have significant impacts on the legitimacy of the court and increase of legal liberalism. It is necessary to factor the potential consequences for public trusts inn the courts as well as the overall functioning of the judicial system. Together, these studies demonstrate that court packing and unpacking can have significant effects on court legitimacy and the rise of legal liberalism. It is essential to consider the potential consequences for public trust in the courts and the overall functioning of the judicial system. Implications for Democratic Resilience and Scrutiny of Economic Evidence The literature also brings out t...