Year-end Sale % OFF 
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.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
