The Rights Paradox

Rezensionen / Stimmen

'Drawing on a range of literatures, Zilis develops a compelling and original argument: Citizens evaluate the Supreme Court based on the groups they think the Court is supporting. That alone makes his book a great read. But Zilis goes further, assessing his claim against survey and experimental data covering a range of groups. No readers will leave The Rights Paradox without rethinking everything they thought they knew about the Court's legitimacy.' Lee Epstein, Washington University in St. Louis 'We're in a renaissance period right now with respect to how scholars assess the vital relationship between the US Supreme Court and public opinion. Zilis' The Rights Paradox demonstrates his role as a leading contributor to not just these efforts, but, as he persuasively demonstrates with a bevy of analyses, to our broader understanding of fundamental tenets of judicial behavior as well. This is an exceptionally important book that needs to be read by anyone who researches or teaches about the US Supreme Court.' Ryan Black, Michigan State University 'The Rights Paradox presents an insightful argument about public attitudes toward the Supreme Court and a set of well-designed studies to probe its validity. Zilis provides a new perspective on the forces that shape the Court's legitimacy, a perspective that has important implications for our understanding of the Court.' Lawrence Baum, The Ohio State University 'Zilis successfully integrates several scholarly strands - public opinion, identity politics, the substance of judicial decisions, institutional legitimacy, and judicial decision making - into a definitive scholarly contribution. Not only does The Rights Paradox provide an original explanation of how individuals' feelings toward groups involved in Supreme Court controversies translate into legitimacy judgments, it also connects that theory back to strategic decision making on the Supreme Court.' Brandon L. Bartels, George Washington University
 
'Drawing on a range of literatures, Zilis develops a compelling and original argument: Citizens evaluate the Supreme Court based on the groups they think the Court is supporting. That alone makes his book a great read. But Zilis goes further, assessing his claim against survey and experimental data covering a range of groups. No readers will leave The Rights Paradox without rethinking everything they thought they knew about the Court's legitimacy.' Lee Epstein, Washington University in St. Louis
'We're in a renaissance period right now with respect to how scholars assess the vital relationship between the US Supreme Court and public opinion. Zilis' The Rights Paradox demonstrates his role as a leading contributor to not just these efforts, but, as he persuasively demonstrates with a bevy of analyses, to our broader understanding of fundamental tenets of judicial behavior as well. This is an exceptionally important book that needs to be read by anyone who researches or teaches about the US Supreme Court.' Ryan Black, Michigan State University
'The Rights Paradox presents an insightful argument about public attitudes toward the Supreme Court and a set of well-designed studies to probe its validity. Zilis provides a new perspective on the forces that shape the Court's legitimacy, a perspective that has important implications for our understanding of the Court.' Lawrence Baum, The Ohio State University
'Zilis successfully integrates several scholarly strands - public opinion, identity politics, the substance of judicial decisions, institutional legitimacy, and judicial decision making - into a definitive scholarly contribution. Not only does The Rights Paradox provide an original explanation of how individuals' feelings toward groups involved in Supreme Court controversies translate into legitimacy judgments, it also connects that theory back to strategic decision making on the Supreme Court.' Brandon L. Bartels, George Washington University