Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique
Interest group litigation is often seen as pitting social interests against the state. This view matches a wider perspective that judicial review is a battle between state and social actors. Recently, neo-institutionalist and postpluralists have led political scientists to question the assumptions that underlie these traditional views of judicial review and interest group litigation. If the state is an active patron of interest group litigation then the way we see interest group litigation and judicial review must change. This article traces the history of the Court Challenges Program of Canada and concludes that the Program's evolution challenges the traditional views of judicial review and interest group litigation. It shows an embedded state at war with itself in court.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.