● Doctrinal constraints an analytic recap ○ Doctrinal constraints ■ Definition● Limits on judicial power (laws of justiciability)● Limits on judicial coercion (remedy laws)■ Attributes● Vagues versus specific ● Credibility of signals ○ “Cheap talk” vs. “strong signals”■ Give the logic of the triad, we know judged are likely to say the law matter. How do you know doctrine really matters■ Text analysis of the signal, behavioral analysis and “judicial can’t” ● Institutional constraints: definitions ○ Limits on the courts that stem from…■ The way in which courts are internally organized (internal controls) ■ The way in which courts interact with other political actors (external constraints) ● External constraints: federal checks and balances○ National constituency (mediated through the electoral college)■ President● Federal courts (appointed for life with guaranteed salary)○ Appointment power, signs legislations, executive power○ Congress■ Advice and consent (senate), budgetary, legislative power● Senate ○ State-wide constituency ● House ○ Local constituency (mediated by district)■ As judicial policy making has increased, these processes have become more politicized Example of internal constraints Key conceptsCourts are passive ● Rules of justiciability (both a doctrinal and institutional constraint)● The role of legal resources in setting judicial agendas US courts are internally fragmented Weberian bureaucracy versus fragmented authority ● Galanter and “why the haves come out ahead”○ What are “repeat players” (RP’s) and “one-shotters” (OS’s)?■ RP’s: litigants who are engaged in many similar litigants over times■ OS’s: litigants who have only occasional recourse to the courts■ Why do RP’s come out ahead?■ greater resources■ greater expertise■ greater access to specialists (+strategic use of conflict of interest lswd■ Develop relations with judges, decision-makers■ Play the odds and play for the rules over timelitigant Type of litigation Repeat playermicrosoft Intellectual property yesNAACP School desegregation yesFederal government Tax dispute yesDonald trump Potential challenge to his presidencyNo, resources but an individual suits not a “portfolio” of similar ones● SO WHAT?○ All things being equal, uneven distribution of legal resources can serve and a significant limit to power■ Because if certain groups lace access to layers, they can’t (or are unlikelyto) file a suit and bring courts into the policy-making game● The inefficiency of courts○ The weberian ideal bureaucracy● Clear chain of command● Clear rules and procedures● Specialization■ The US courts contrasted● Fragmented authority and imperfect hierarchical controls● Often unclear rules and procedures● Courts of general jurisdiction - as opposed to specialised courts● SO WHAT AGAIN○ All things being equal, internally fragmented courts will not act in a coordinated fashion which can be a significant limitation on■ Judicial power (one court can’t speak for another)■ Judicial coercion (courts often won't speak in a single voice)● Cultural constraints: def and example○ Limits on courts that stem from elite public opinion■ Subway graffiti article and landlord article - reluctance + resistance = constraint and judicial power■ Brown v. board - supreme court decision + strong local resistance = need for congressional and executive