Court structure reforms can alter courts’ role in governing unexpectedly

Evidence

Some reforms—for instance, the creation of the federal courts of appeals— have undoubtedly produced a more efficient administration of justice. The verdict on others, among them state court consolidation, is less clear. What is clear, however, is that structural and jurisdictional changes have had diverse—and at times unanticipated—effects on the role that courts play in governing. As burgeoning caseloads prompt renewed calls for reform, wise reformers will keep in mind the broader effects that their efforts to alleviate caseload pressures might produce. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 351

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: States historically added piecemeal courts, prompting later consolidation reforms — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 350; Court structural reforms produce diverse and often unanticipated governance effects — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 459; Court structure shapes which policy issues a supreme court can address. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 441 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Court structural reforms produce diverse and often unanticipated governance effects #corroborates (0.96) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 459
• Court structure shapes which policy issues a supreme court can address. #expands (0.74) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 441
• Court composition changes drove litigants to shift between courts and legislatures #exemplifies (0.72) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3143