The Supreme Court and the legal status of political parties

1995 1995

Other formats: Order a copy

Abstract (summary)

American political parties, throughout their history, have functioned as central institutions of governance and democracy. While their legislative and policy making role remains vital today, their identity as a link between citizens and government has changed markedly in this century. A major reason for their shifting electoral role has been the emergence of state governments as active regulators of the political process in the Progressive Era.

Since the late 1960's, the U.S. Supreme Court has adjudicated a series of disputes involving this legalized electoral environment, becoming in the process a major interpreter of the legal status of political parties. The absence of any reference to parties in the text of the Constitution has given the justices of the Court significant authority in structuring the constitutional status of parties. The dissertation examines the ideas which have guided the exercise of that authority, and explores their implications for the American party system and American democracy.

Analysis of Court opinions involving ballot access, party organization/nomination procedures, campaign finance, and patronage reveals two opposing schools of thought among the justices of the Court. One viewpoint envisions politics as a "natural order" nurtured by wide party competition and access to the electoral arena, and perverted by many state regulations. A contrasting vision sees politics as a "constructed order" nurtured by stable party competition and best preserved by state regulation. These differing ideas of party politics are reflected in the justices' conceptions of political competition and choice, party structure and functions, judicial standards of review, and the proper role of government in the electoral process.

The political implications of these contending viewpoints extend beyond the purely judicial realm, shaping the future of the American electoral system and efforts to build stronger parties. An analysis of these schools of thought using a set of "strong party/responsible party" attributes concludes that, while the "natural order" offers parties some increase in autonomy, neither viewpoint offers a clear road to stronger parties. The quest for party renewal must ultimately be as political as it has been judicial. In addition, these opinions reflects a broader, continuing debate over whether democracy is best understood as expression (access, competition) or governance (legislative representation, stability).

Indexing (details)

Political science
0615: Political science
Identifier / keyword
Social sciences
The Supreme Court and the legal status of political parties
Petterson, Paul R.
Number of pages
Publication year
Degree date
School code
DAI-A 56/11, Dissertation Abstracts International
Place of publication
Ann Arbor
Country of publication
United States
Mileur, Jerome M.
University of Massachusetts Amherst
University location
United States -- Massachusetts
Source type
Dissertations & Theses
Document type
Dissertation/thesis number
ProQuest document ID
Database copyright ProQuest LLC; ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works.
Document URL
Access the complete full text

You can get the full text of this document if it is part of your institution's ProQuest subscription.

Try one of the following:

  • Connect to ProQuest through your library network and search for the document from there.
  • Request the document from your library.
  • Go to the ProQuest login page and enter a ProQuest or My Research username / password.