-
Judicial Populism
- Author(s):
- Anya Bernstein, Glen Staszewski
- Date:
- 2021
- Group(s):
- MSU Law Faculty Repository
- Item Type:
- Article
- Permanent URL:
- https://doi.org/10.17613/2cpq-ek29
- Abstract:
- The rise of populism is one of the most significant developments in contemporary politics.1 This phenomenon can be difficult to capture succinctly: populism does not constitute a uniform political movement, and the label has been applied to quite different political movements and moments.2 But commentators generally recognize a particular, contemporary form of authoritarian populism characterized by several key traits.3 Populist leaders claim to represent the will of a morally pure people against a corrupt, out-oftouch, or unresponsive elite.4 They present this "people" as a unified whole, with a single, undifferentiated will to which the populist leader claims exclusive, unmediated access.s Populists use this image-one leader, one people, one will-to suggest that political questions have one correct answer: the answer the populist provides.6 They deny the very possibility of legitimate disagreement and seek to exclude those who diverge from the populist's view, labeling them outsiders or even enemies.? Populism is thus an exclusionary form of identity politics.8 Populist leaders use this rhetorical frame to claim legitimacy by fiat. Populism challenges the commitments of republican democracy, which rests on institutions that mediate the divergent interests of a pluralistic populace through ongoing negotiation to produce incremental, provisional responses to the public's problems.9
- Metadata:
- xml
- Published as:
- Journal article
- Status:
- Published
- Last Updated:
- 1 year ago
- License:
- Attribution
- Share this:
An online community for ASEEES members
judicial-populism.pdf