The Supreme Court: Rehnquist's or Reagan's?

• Author: Sue Davis
• Published date: 01 March 1991
• DOI: 10.1177/106591299104400105
• Date: 01 March 1991
• Subject Matter: Articles

THE

SUPREME

COURT:

REHNQUIST’S

OR

REAGAN’S?

SUE

DAVIS

Uniaersity

of

Delaware

cholars

have

examined

leadership

on

the

Supreme

Court

exten-

sively

(see,

for

example,

Danelski

1960;

Slotnick

1979;

Spaeth

1984;

Murphy

1964;

Steamer

1986).

But

almost

nothing

is

known

about

the

impact

of

Chief

Justice

Rehnquist

on

the

decision-making

of

the

Court.

As

the

Court’s

shift

to

the

right

became

clear

at

the

end

of

the

1988

term,1

observers

proclaimed

the

arrival

of

a

genuine

Rehnqu-

ist

Court

bearing

the

Chief

Justice’s

distinct

imprint

(see,

for

example,

Wermiel

1989).

Such

pronouncements,

based

upon

an

assumption

that

Rehnquist’s

leadership

had

been

instrumental

in

cementing

the

con-

servative

majority,

left

important

questions

unanswered.

Is

Rehnquist’s

leadership

responsible

for

the

emergence

of

the

solid

conservative

majority?2

Has

he

built

that

majority

with

his

skills

in

leading

the

RECEIVED:

April

4,

1990

REVISION

RECEIVED:

July

5,

1990

ACCEPTED

FOR

PUBLICATION:

July

6,

1990

1

See

for

example,

decisions

restricting

the

use

of

the

anti-discrimination

provisions

in

the

federal

law

(

Patterson

v.

McLean,

109

S.Ct.

2363

[1989]

Wards

Cove

Packing

Co.

v.

Atonio,

109

S.Ct.

2115

[1989]),

striking

down

a

minority

set-aside

program

(

Richmond

v.

Croson,

109

S.Ct.

706

[1989]),

facilitating

challenges

to

court-approved

affirmative

action

plans

(

Martin

v.

Wilks,

109

S.Ct.

2180

[1989]),

upholding

drug

testing

for

federal

employees

(

National

Treasury

Employees

Union

v.

Von

Raab,

109

S.Ct.

1384

[1989];

Skinner

v.

Railway

Labor

Executives’ Association,

109

S.Ct.

1402

[1989]),

undercutting

the

precedents

of

the

Warren

Court

concerning

the

rights

of

the

accused

(

Duckworth

v.

Eagan

109

S.Ct.

2875;

U.S.

v.

Sokolow,

109

S.Ct.

1581

[1989];

Florida

v.

Riley,

109

S.Ct.

693

[1989]),

and

upholding

the

death

penalty

for

those

who

commit

murder

at

the

age

of

sixteen

and

for

the

mentally

retarded

(

Penry

v.

Lynaugh,

109

S.Ct.

[1989];

Stanford

v.

Kentucky

109

S.Ct.

2969

[1989]).

On

the

last

day

of

the

term

the

Court

approved

state

restrictions

on

abortions,

including

a

ban

on

the

use

of

state

facilities

and

personnel

and

a

requirement

of

a

test

to

determine

viability

(

Webster

v.

Reproductive

Services,

109

S.Ct.

3040

[1989]).

2

The

terms

conservative

and

liberal

are

used

throughout

this

paper

in

the

same

way

that

they

are

used

in

judicial

behavior

research.

A

conservative

vote

or

decision

is

one

against

a

claimant

in

a

civil

liberties

case

(with

the

exception

of

takings

claims

where

a

conservative

vote

is

one

in

favor

of

the

claimant),

against

the

regulation

or

against

the

underdog

in

a

case

involving

economic

activity,

for

the

state

in

a case

involving

federalism,

and

where

the

exercise

of

judicial

power

is

involved

against

the

use

of

such

power.

A

liberal

vote

is

just

the

opposite.