Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Johnson, G. (2014). Executive power and judicial deference: Judicial decision making on executive power challenges in the American states. Political Research Quarterly, 68(1), 128–141.

Abstract: Judicial intervention is often required to define the boundaries of executive power. Although many separation of powers analyses examine the interaction of courts and legislatures, few examine how the design of executive and judicial institutions affect judicial decision making in cases involving challenges to executive power in the U.S. context. I argue that the degree of judicial institutional vulnerability to executive retaliation will have a significant impact on judicial making. Using an original dataset of cases involving executive power challenges in the American states between 1980 and 2010, I find that courts are more likely to uphold executive power in environments where the threat of institutional retaliation from the executive is high. The results of this analysis indicate that the strength of judicial checks against executive power depends on broader relations of institutional authority, not just on constitutional doctrine or culture.

Journal Article 2: Teten, R. L. (2007). “We the People” the “modern” rhetorical popular address of the presidents during the founding period. Political Research Quarterly, 60(4), 669–682.

Abstract: This article examines the usage of popular address rhetoric within all the State of the Union Addresses to determine whether presidents have consistently used this rhetorical tool, or whether the introduction of going public is indeed a “modern” development that was little used in the rhetorical past of the presidency. By looking at instances in which the president identifies himself with the people, Congress, or as president, the author finds that many formerly “traditional” presidents exhibit “modern” tendencies, which suggests inconsistencies with the “traditional/modern” divide that is a commonly utilized paradigm in presidential study.