American Politics Today - Essentials (3rd Ed)

ENDNOTES A37

c. Oral arguments in U.S. v. Jones (2012), November 8, 2011, www

.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/

10-1259.pdf, p. 44 (accessed 8/20/12).

CHAPTER 5

1. “Two-Thirds of Democrats Now Support Gay Marriage,”
   Pew Research Center, July 31, 2012, http://www.pewforum
   .org/Politics-and-Elections/2012-opinions-on-for-gay
   -marriage-unchanged-after-obamas-announcement.aspx
   (accessed 9/5/12).


2. "No Consensus about Whether Nation Is Divided into Haves and
   Have Nots," Pew Research Center, September 29, 2011, www
   .people-press.org/2011/09/29/no-consensus-about-whether
   -nation-is-divided-into-haves-and-have-nots (accessed 9/5/17).


3. For a description of this argument and a dissenting view, see
   Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Adams, and Jeremy C. Pope, Cul-
   ture Wars: The Myth of a Polarized America (New York: Long-
   man, 2010).


4. TK.


5. For a review, see Arthur Lupia and Mathew D. McCubbins,
   The Democratic Dilemma (New York: Cambridge University
   Press, 1998).


6. Robert S. Erikson, Michael B. Mackuen, and James A. Stimson,
   The Macro Polity (New York: Cambridge University Press,
   2002).


7. Donald Green, Bradley Palmquist, and Eric Schickler, “Mac-
   ropartisanship: A Replication and Critique,” American Politi-
   cal Science Review 92 (1998): 883–99; Robert S. Erikson,
   Michael B. Mackuen, and James A. Stimson, “What Moves
   Macropartisanship? A Response to Green, Palmquist, and
   Schickler,” American Political Science Review 92 (1998):
   901–12.


8. John Zaller, “Coming to Grips with V. O. Key’s Concept of
   Latent Opinion” (unpublished paper, University of California,
   Los Angeles, 1998).


9. Morris Fiorina, Retrospective Voting in American National
   Elections (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981).


10. John Zaller, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (New
    York: Cambridge University Press, 1992).


11. R. Michael Alvarez and John Brehm, Hard Choices, Easy
    Answers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002).


12. John Zaller and Stanley Feldman, “A Theory of the Survey
    Response: Revealing Preferences versus Answering Ques-
    tions,” American Journal of Political Science 36 (1992):
    579–616.


13. Janet M. Box-Steff ensmeier and Susan DeBoef, “Macroparti-
    sanship and Macroideology in the Sophisticated Electorate,”
    Journal of Politics 63:1 (2001): 232–48.


14. Jack Citrin, Donald P. Green, Christopher Muste, and Cara
    Wong, “Public Opinion toward Immigration Reform: The Role
    of Economic Motivations,” American Journal of Political Sci-
    ence 59:3 (1997): 858–82.


15. William G. Jacoby, “Issue Framing and Public Opinion on
    Government Spending,” American Journal of Political Science


16. The case concerning African Americans is Batson v. Ken-
    tucky, 106 S. Ct. 1712 (1986); the case about Latinos is Her-
    nandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (1991); and the gender
    case is J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994). Two
    recent cases affi rming that peremptory challenges could not
    be used in a racially discriminatory fashion were Miller-El v.
    Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (2005), and Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S.
    472 (2008).


17. Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000); United States v.
    Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005); Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S.
    296 (2004). For a discussion of these and other relevant cases
    see Stephanos Bibas and Susan Klein, “The Sixth Amend-
    ment and Criminal Sentencing,” Cardozo Law Review 30,
    no.3 (2008): 775–805.


18. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972); Gregg v. Georgia, 428
    U.S. 513 (1976).


19. See Abraham and Perry, Freedom and the Court, pp. 72–73,
    for a discussion of the earlier cases, and Charles Lane, “5–4
    Supreme Court Abolishes Juvenile Executions,” Washington
    Post, March 2, 2005, p. A1, for a discussion of the 2002 and
    2005 cases. The 2008 case was Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554
    U.S.—(2008).


20. Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).


21. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).


22. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992); Helling v. McKinney,
    509 U.S. 25 (1993).


23. Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (1983).


24. Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991).


25. Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (2003); Lockyer v. Andrade,
    538 U.S. 63 (2003). For a general discussion of these issues,
    see Editors’ Note, “The Eighth Amendment, Proportionality,
    and the Changing Meaning of ‘Punishments,’” Harvard Law
    Review 122, no.3 (January 2009): 960–81.


26. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), 482–86.


27. Griswold v. Connecticut, 512–13.


28. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), 129.


29. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,
    505 U.S. 833 (1992).


30. Katharine Q. Seeyle, “Mississippi Voters Reject Anti-Abor-
    tion Measure,” New York Times, November 8, 2011, www
    .nytimes.com/2011/11/09/us/politics/votes-across-the
    -nation-could-serve-as-a-political-barometer.html (accessed
    12/5/11).


31. Department of Human Services, Offi ce of Disease Preven-
    tion and Epidemiology, “Annual Report on Oregon’s Death
    with Dignity Act,” March 10, 2012, http://www.publichealth.oregon
    .gov/ProviderPartnerResources/EvaluationResearch/Death
    WithDignityAct/Documents/year14.pdf (accessed 8/21/12).


32. Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 23 (2006).


33. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

You Decide

a. Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Decline to Rule on Limits for
Drug-Sniffi ng Dogs,” New York Times, April 5, 2005, p. A19.
b. Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005).