Judicial decisions as legislation: Congressional oversight of Supreme Court tax cases, 1954-2005

N.C. Staudt, R. Lindstädt, J. O'Connor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)


his Article offers a new understanding of the dynamic between the Supreme Court and Congress. It responds to an important literature that for several decades has misunderstood interbranch relations as continually fraught with antagonism and distrust. This unfriendly dynamic, many have argued, is evidenced by repeated congressional overrides of Supreme Court cases. While this claim is true in some circumstances, it ignores the friendly relations that exist between these two branches of government-relations that may be far more typical than scholars suspect. This Article undertakes a comprehensive study of congressional responses to Supreme Court tax cases and makes a surprising finding: Overrides, although the main focus of the extant literature, account for just a small portion of the legislative activity responding to the Court. In fact, Congress is nearly as likely to support and affirm judicial decisionmaking through the codification of a case outcome as it is to reverse a decision through a legislative override. To investigate fully the nature of congressional oversight of Supreme Court decisionmaking, this Article undertakes both qualitative and quantitative analyses of different types of legislative review of Supreme Court decisions-examining codifications and citations, as well as over-rides, in legislative debates, committees, and hearings. The result is a series of important and robust findings that challenge and build on the Court-Congress literature, identifying the legal, political, and economic factors that explain how and why legislators take notice of Supreme Court cases. The study reveals a complex and nuanced interbranch dynamic and shows that the Justices themselves affect the legislative agenda to a greater extent than previously understood. This result challenges scholars who have questioned whether the Supreme Court should have jurisdiction over complex issues, such as those in the economic context, in which the Justices may lack sufficient training. This Article argues that scholars have little need to worry about Court decisionmaking in these areas: Not only do legislators routinely review the Court's decisions, but they also frequently confirm the outcomes as valuable contributions to national policymaking via the codification process.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1340-1402
JournalNew York University Law Review
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 2007


Dive into the research topics of 'Judicial decisions as legislation: Congressional oversight of Supreme Court tax cases, 1954-2005'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this