Partisanship, Trump, and the Normative Implications of Presidential Particularism: A Response to Pasachoff’s Executive Branch Control of Federal Grants
Research Question
What are the broader implications of presidential particularism, and how does it relate to populism and executive branch governance?
Main Finding
The authors defend and extend their theory of presidential particularism in response to critique. They argue that particularistic policymaking is a persistent and central feature of executive governance, not a marginal or exceptional behavior.
Research Design
This is a conceptual reply that synthesizes normative and empirical arguments, responding to legal scholarship and expanding the theoretical implications of prior findings.
Data Employed
The paper draws on previously published empirical studies of presidential behavior, federal spending, and administrative discretion.
Substantive Importance
The reply sharpens the normative critique of presidential governance and stresses how particularism can undermine equal protection and public trust. It contributes to interdisciplinary debates on executive power and the rule of law.
Research Areas
Presidential Particularism, Presidential Power, Democratic Accountability, Normative Theory, Legal Scholarship
Citation
@article{pasachoff-reply,
author = {Kriner, Douglas and Reeves, Andrew},
title = {Partisanship, Trump, and the Normative Implications of Presidential Particularism: A Response to Pasachoff's Executive Branch Control of Federal Grants},
journal = {Ohio State Law Journal Online},
volume = {83},
pages = {230--246},
year = {2022},
}