Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The American Review of Public Administration
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosenbloom, D. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ross, B. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Toward a New Jurisprudence of Constitutional Federalism

The Supreme Court in the 1990s and Public Administration

David H. Rosenbloom

American University

Bernard H. Ross

American University

In the 1990s, narrow majorities on the Supreme Court have reinvigorated constitutional federalism by strengthening dual sovereignty and developing a new jurisprudence for analyzing key principles of federalism. The new dual sovereignty enhances the Reserve Clause, limits Congress's Commerce Clause powers, and broadens the 11th Amendment's sovereign immunity. The new jurisprudence promotes policy and administrative diversity among the states, thereby enhancing their ability to serve as laboratories for the development of public management theories and practices. The new reality of enforceable constitutional limits to national power can invigorate discourse about federalism within the public administration community. In practice, the new jurisprudence makes some national cooperative federalism arrangements more costly or impossible. The jurisprudence is conceptualized as federalism, not intergovernmental relations, and it does not speak specifically to local governmental matters. In addition, it is not well suited for analyzing and resolving collective action problems.

The American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 28, No. 2, 107-125 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/027507409802800201


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The American Review of Public AdministrationHome page
R. T. Green
Common Law, Equity, and American Public Administration
The American Review of Public Administration, September 1, 2002; 32(3): 263 - 294.
[Abstract] [PDF]