Constitutional hardball

Last updated

Constitutional hardball is the exploitation of procedures, laws and institutions by political actors for partisan gain in ways which violate pre-established norms and push the bounds of legality. [1] [2] Legal scholars and political scientists have characterized constitutional hardball as a threat to democracy, because it undermines shared understanding of democratic norms and undermines the expectation that the other side will comply with democratic norms. As a result, the use of constitutional hardball by one side of partisans encourages other partisans to respond in similar fashion. [3] [4] [2]

Contents

The concept stems from a 2004 article by Mark Tushnet of Harvard Law School. [5] [6] Harvard University political scientists Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky have argued that democracies such as Argentina and Venezuela shifted to authoritarianism in part through constitutional hardball, as Juan Perón and Hugo Chavez used legal court-packing schemes to cement power. [7]

In the United States

Examples of constitutional hardball include the use of the debt ceiling to force others to agree to one's demands (hostage-taking), disenfranchising voters for the opposing party (voter suppression), routine use of the filibuster, routine refusal of appointments, court-packing, [8] actions by lame-duck administrations and legislatures to curb the powers of incoming legislators and administrations, using pardoning powers on oneself or one's associates, and refusal to commit to the peaceful transition of power. [4] [1] [2] [9] [10] [7] [11] [12]

David Pozen, Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, wrote in 2018 that "the concept of constitutional hardball seemed to be passing into common usage" in the United States. [11]

It has been suggested that the use of constitutional hardball in the United States Congress has strengthened the role of the executive in policy-making, as the President becomes more likely to use the powers of office to circumvent the legislature; Obama's use of executive orders is mentioned as an example of constitutional hardball. [4] [13] In the 1990's, House Speaker Newt Gingrich's use of "asymmetric constitutional hardball" led to increasing polarization in American politics. [14] [15] [16]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of the United States</span>

In the United States, politics functions within a framework of a constitutional federal republic. The three distinct branches share powers: the U.S. Congress which forms the legislative branch, a bicameral legislative body comprising the House of Representatives and the Senate; the executive branch, which is headed by the president of the United States, who serves as the country's head of state and government; and the judicial branch, composed of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, and which exercises judicial power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Republican Party (United States)</span> American political party

The Republican Party, also known as the Grand Old Party (GOP), is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States. It emerged as the main political rival of the then-dominant Democratic Party in the 1850s, and the two parties have dominated American politics since then.

An electoral college is a body whose task is to elect a candidate to a particular office. It is mostly used in the political context for a constitutional body that appoints the head of state or government, and sometimes the upper parliamentary chamber, in a democracy. Its members, called electors, are either elected by the people for this purpose or by certain subregional entities or social organizations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Newt Gingrich</span> American politician and author (born 1943)

Newton Leroy Gingrich is an American politician and author who served as the 50th speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. A member of the Republican Party, he was the U.S. representative for Georgia's 6th congressional district serving north Atlanta and nearby areas from 1979 until his resignation in 1999. In 2012, Gingrich unsuccessfully ran for the Republican nomination for president of the United States.

The "Republican Revolution", "Revolution of '94", or "Gingrich Revolution" are political slogans that refer to the Republican Party's (GOP) success in the 1994 U.S. mid-term elections, which resulted in a net gain of 54 seats in the House of Representatives, and a pick-up of eight seats in the Senate. It was led by Newt Gingrich.

Political polarization is the divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization.

Democrat Party is an epithet and pejorative for the Democratic Party of the United States, often used in a disparaging fashion by the party's opponents. While use of the term started out as non-hostile, it has grown in its negative use since the 1940s, in particular by members of the Republican Party—in party platforms, partisan speeches, and press releases—as well as by conservative commentators and third party politicians.

The term "illiberal democracy" describes a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures". There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Steven Levitsky</span> American political scientist

Steven Levitsky is an American political scientist currently serving as a professor of government at Harvard University and a senior fellow for democracy at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. Political scientists have created typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.

A hybrid regime is a type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one. Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections. Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states. Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time. There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gerrymandering in the United States</span> Setting electoral district boundaries to favor specific political interests

Gerrymandering is the practice of setting boundaries of electoral districts to favor specific political interests within legislative bodies, often resulting in districts with convoluted, winding boundaries rather than compact areas. The term "gerrymandering" was coined after a review of Massachusetts's redistricting maps of 1812 set by Governor Elbridge Gerry noted that one of the districts looked like a mythical salamander.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kim Lane Scheppele</span> American scholar of law and politics

Kim Lane Scheppele is an American scholar of law and politics. She is the Laurance S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs in the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs and in the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic backsliding</span> National decline in democracy

Democratic backsliding is a process of regime change toward autocracy in which the exercise of political power becomes more arbitrary and repressive. The process typically restricts the space for public contest and political participation in the process of government selection. Democratic decline involves the weakening of democratic institutions, such as the peaceful transition of power or free and fair elections, or the violation of individual rights that underpin democracies, especially freedom of expression. Democratic backsliding is the opposite of democratization.

<i>How Democracies Die</i> 2018 book on democracy

How Democracies Die is a 2018 comparative politics book by the Harvard University political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt about democratic backsliding and how elected leaders can gradually subvert the democratic process to increase their power. The book also offers stark warnings about the impact of the Republican Party and Donald Trump's presidency on U.S. democracy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Daniel Ziblatt</span> American political scientist

Daniel Ziblatt is an American political scientist who has been Eaton Professor of the Science of Government at Harvard University since 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political polarization in the United States</span>

Political polarization is a prominent component of politics in the United States. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization, both of which are apparent in the United States. In the last few decades, the U.S. has experienced a greater surge in ideological polarization and affective polarization than comparable democracies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic backsliding by country</span>

Democratic backsliding, also known as autocratization, is the decline in democratic qualities of a political regime, the opposite of democratization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic backsliding in the United States</span> Periods of democratic decline in the U.S.

Democratic backsliding in the United States has been identified as a trend at the state and national levels in various indices and analyses. Democratic backsliding is "a process of regime change towards autocracy that makes the exercise of political power more arbitrary and repressive and that restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection".

David Pozen is the Charles Keller Beekman Professor of Law at Columbia University, where he specializes in constitutional law, information law, and nonprofit law. Pozen has written extensively in the area of constitutional law.

References

  1. 1 2 Pierson, Paul; Hacker, Jacob S.; Persily, Nathaniel, Editor (2015). Confronting Asymmetric Polarization. Cambridge University Press. pp. 59–70. doi:10.1017/cbo9781316091906.003. ISBN   9781107087118 . Retrieved January 6, 2019.{{cite book}}: |first3= has generic name (help); |website= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. 1 2 3 Levitsky, Steven; Ziblatt, Daniel (2018). "How Democracies Die". Penguin Publishing Random house.
  3. Bernstein, Jonathan (December 4, 2018). "Constitutional Hardball Is Back. Look Out". Bloomberg.
  4. 1 2 3 Valelly, Rick (2018-04-08). "Trump Meets Political Science". Washington Monthly . Vol. April/May/June 2018. ISSN   0043-0633 . Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  5. Tushnet, Mark V. (2004) Constitutional Hardball, PDF 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 523-553 John Marshall School of Law
  6. Glassman, Matt (December 11, 2018). "Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan want to weaken incoming Democratic governors. Here's what's the usual partisan politics — and what isn't". The Washington Post . Retrieved January 16, 2019.
  7. 1 2 Levitsky, Steven; Ziblatt, Daniel (January 27, 2018). "How Wobbly Is Our Democracy?". The New York Times . ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  8. Lemieux, Scott (May 2018). "Democrats: Prepare to Pack the Supreme Court". The New Republic . Retrieved January 13, 2019.
  9. Matthews, Dylan (July 2, 2018). "Court-packing, Democrats' nuclear option for the Supreme Court, explained". Vox . Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  10. Melber, Ari. "What happens when losers of elections won't relinquish power?". The Washington Post .
  11. 1 2 Pozen, David (October 11, 2018). "Hardball and/as Anti-Hardball". Lawfare . Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  12. "Democracy's Undemocratic Transition of Power". Brown Political Review. 2020-12-10. Retrieved 2020-12-10.
  13. Yglesias, Matt (October 8, 2015). "American democracy is doomed". Vox . Retrieved January 19, 2019.
  14. McCoy, Jennifer L.; Somer, Murat (November 29, 2021). "Political Parties, Elections, and Pernicious Polarization in the Rise of Illiberalism". In Sajó, András; Uitz, Renáta; Holmes, Stephen (eds.). Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism (1 ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 486–499. doi:10.4324/9780367260569. ISBN   9781000479454 . Retrieved November 11, 2024. p. 497: However, during the 1980s the rise of powerful and entrepreneurial politicians such as Newt Gingrich within the Republican Party, who promised to strengthen the party, were instrumental in the radicalization of this party's strategies in the US. These strategies helped the party win control of the House in 1994 after being in the minority in 58 of the prior 62 years (Mettler and Lieberman 2020), but also contributed to the growing polarization of US politics.{{cite encyclopedia}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  15. Lovett, Adam (November 7, 2022). "The ethics of asymmetric politics". Politics, Philosophy & Economics. 22 (1): 3–30. doi:10.1177/1470594X221133445. ISSN   1470-594X. Archived from the original on November 11, 2024. Retrieved November 11, 2024. In the 1990s, the Republican Party went off the deep end. At a first and very rough approximation, we can pin the blame on Newt Gingrich. Gingrich had been elected to the House of Representatives in 1978. The problem with the Republican Party at the time, he said, was 'that we don't encourage you to be nasty'.
  16. Fishkin, Joseph; Pozen, David E. (April 2018). "ASYMMETRIC CONSTITUTIONAL HARDBALL". Columbia Law Review. 118 (3): 915–982. ISSN   0010-1958. JSTOR   26397699 . Retrieved November 10, 2024. The Republican Party has moved significantly further to the right than the Democratic Party has moved to the left.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)