Litigants shift forums and legal grounds to follow whichever courts are most receptive.

Evidence

The new judicial federalism shows both the independent policy role played by state courts and the influence of federal court policymaking on state courts. From the 1930s to the 1960s, federal courts took a more expansive view of civil liberties than did state courts. This led litigants who sought to protect or expand rights to file their suits in federal court or base their claims in state court on the federal Constitution. Only when the Supreme Court became less receptive to their claims, as a result of personnel changes, did civil-liberties advocates turn their attention to state courts and state law. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3376

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines ‘new judicial federalism’ as a two-way relationship between state court independence and federal policymaking influence.
• XREF: Directly ties to course themes of judicial interpretation, personnel-driven doctrinal change, and forum choice. — connects to: The Supreme Court’s signals shape which cases litigants choose to bring — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 902; Litigants strategically select forums where procedural rules favor their cases — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 268