Evolución de la jurisprudencia en Estados Unidos: el legado de los nombramientos del primer gobierno del presidente Trump y los debates sobre la reforma judicial en los procesos de designaciones judiciales

• Andrea Rosario Iñiguez Manso ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad Autónoma de Chile

     Universidad Autónoma de Chile

     Temuco, Chile

     
• Localización: Revista Jurídica Digital UANDES, ISSN-e 0719-7942, Vol. 9, Nº. 2, 2025, págs. 130-149
• Idioma: español
• DOI: 10.24822/rjduandes.0902.6
• Títulos paralelos:
  • The evolution of jurisprudence in the United States: the legacy of the appointments of the first Trump ́s administration and the debates on judicial reforms in judicial appointments processes
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen
  • español

    En 2016, Donald John Trump fue elegido presidente de Estados Unidos y, en esa misma elección, el Partido Republicano logró obtener la mayoría en el Senado, lo que facilitó que Trump pudiera nombrar a tres jueces de la Corte Suprema, generando cambios significativos en su jurisprudencia en materia de aborto, acciones afirmativas y regulaciones administrativas. Estos acontecimientos han provocado debates sobre la necesidad de reformar el sistema de selección de jueces de la Corte Suprema. El objetivo de este trabajo es identificar las modificaciones jurisprudenciales más relevantes derivadas de los jueces incorporados durante el primer mandato de Trump, así como analizar las reformas propuestas para mejorar el proceso de selección de jueces de la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos.

  • English

    In 2016, Donald John Trump was elected President of the United States, and in the same election, the Republican Party obtained a majority in the Senate, which enabled Trump to appoint three Supreme Court justices, resulting in significant changes in the Court’s jurisprudence regarding abortion, affirmative action, and administrative regulations. These events have sparked debates on the need to reform the Supreme Court’s judicial selection system. The aim of this study is to identify the most relevant jurisprudential changes arising from the justices appointed during Trump’s first term, as well as to analyze proposed reforms to modify the process for selecting Supreme Court justices in the United States.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Bannon, A. y Milov-Córdoba, M. (2023). Supreme Court term limits: A path to a more accountable High Court. Brennan Center for Justice. https://search.issuelab.org/resource/supreme-court-term-limits-a-path-to-a-more-accountable-high-court.html
  • Bendicksen, L., Kesselheim, A. y Daval, C. J. R. (2023). FDA and Chevron deference. Food and Drug Law Journal, 78, 371-389.
  • Beard, C. (1936). The living constitution. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 185, 29-34.
  • Calabresi, S. (2008). A critical introduction to the originalism debate. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 31(3), 875-897.
  • Caldeira, G. (1987). Public opinion and the U.S Supreme Court: FDR´s court- packing plan. The American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1139-1153.
  • Carson, J. y Kleinerman, B. (2002). A switch in time saves nine: Institutions, strategic actors and FDR´s court packing plan. Public Choice,...
  • Cipriano, S. (2024). The First Amendment and the abortion rights debate. Princeton Legal Journal Forum, 4, 12-14.
  • Cohen, D. S., Greer, D. y Rebouché, R. (2023). The new abortion battleground. Columbia Law Review, 123(1),1-100.
  • Cramton, R. (2007). Reforming the Supreme Court. California Law Review, 95, 1313-1334.
  • Elshtain, J. B. (2000). Roe v. Wade: Speaking the unspeakable. En R. P. George (Ed.), Great cases in constitutional law (pp. 175–191). Princeton...
  • Freeman, S. (1992). Original meaning, democratic interpretation and the Constitution. Philosophy &Public Affairs, 21(1), 3-42.
  • Friedman, B. y Smith, S. B. (1998). The sedimentary Constitution. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 147(1), 1-90.
  • Friedman, S. E. y Weymark, J. A. (2022). Precedent–based judgment: Aggregation in the US Supreme Court. Revue Économique, 73(6), 1069–1092.
  • Garda Jr., R. A. (2024). Students for Fair Admissions through the lens of interest convergence theory: Reality, perception, and fear. Loyola...
  • Gocke, A. (2021). Chevron´s next chapter: A fig leaf for the nondelegation doctrine. UC Davis Law Review, 55, 955-1017.
  • González Tocci, M. L. (2017). Algunas reflexiones sobre la obligatoriedad vertical de los precedentes de la Corte Suprema. Anales de la Academia...
  • Goodman, G. Nagashima, R. y Reber, S. (2023, 7 de noviembre). Admissions at most colleges will be unaffected by Supreme Court ruling on affirmative...
  • Goodwin, B. K. y Smith, V. H. (2024). The Chevron decision and US livestock policy. American Enterprise Institute, 1-5.
  • Grossi, P. y O´Connor, D. (2023). FDA preemption of conflicting state drug regulation and the looming battle over abortion medication. Journal...
  • Guarnieri, I. y Nash, E. (2022, 13 de junio). States have trigger bans- here´s what happens when Roe is overturned. Guttmacher Institute....
  • Hamilton, A., Jay, J. y Madison, J. (1999). The Federalist Papers (C. Rossiter, Ed.). Mentor.
  • Hemel, D. (2021). Can structural changes fix the Supreme Court? The Journal of Economic Perspective, 35(1), 119-142.
  • Hochschild, J. (1998). The strange career of affirmative action. Ohio State Law Journal, 59(3), 997-1038.
  • Iñiguez Manso, A. R. Las acciones afirmativas en el sistema de admisión universitario en la causa Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President...
  • Kalman, L. (2005). The Constitution, the Supreme Court, and the New Deal. The American Historical Review, 110(4), 1052-1080.
  • Kammen, M. (1987). “A vehicle of life”: The Founders’ intention and American perceptions of their living Constitution. Proceedings of the...
  • Kaufman, W. (2014). The truth about originalism. The Pluralist, 9(1), 39-54.
  • Keglovits, K. (2022). A way forward after Dobbs: Human rights advocacy and self-managed abortion in the United States. Duke Journal of Constitutional...
  • Kreft, C. (2025, 23 de diciembre). Non potest delegari: How the common law principle of agency recasts the nondelegation doctrine. Federalist...
  • Krishnakumar, A. (2022). Statutory history. Virginia Law Review, 108, 263-351.
  • McDowell, G. (2010). The language of law and the foundations of American constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press.
  • McMillion, B. (2022). Supreme Court appointment process: President’s selection of a nominee (CRS Report No. R44235). Congressional Research...
  • Maltz, E. M. (1994). Rethinking constitutional law, originalism, interventionism and the politics of judicial review. University Press of...
  • Mitchell, W. D. (1931). Appointment of federal district judges. American Bar Association Journal, 17(9), 569-574.
  • Ogale, A. (2022). Vagueness and nondelegation, Virginia Law Review, 108(3), 783-828.
  • Pérez Alonso, J. (2023). Crónica de la batalla judicial en torno al aborto: de Roe v.Wade a Dobbs v. Jackson. Teoría y Realidad Constitucional,...
  • Robbins, K. (2024). Chevron overturned: How the Loper decision is likely to affect the power of regulatory agencies in the near future. Juris...
  • Ryan, J. E. (2011). Laying claim to the Constitution: The promise of new textualism, Virginia Law Review, 97(7), 1523-1572.
  • Scalia, A. (2008). Foreword. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 31(3), 871-874.
  • Shapiro, W. (2020). Court packing is not the solution. En Democracy & justice: Collected writings (pp. 91-92). Brennan Center for Justice....
  • Stone, G. (2011). Understanding Supreme Court confirmations. The Supreme Court Review, 2010(1), 381-467. https://doi.org/10.1086/658391
  • Sunstein, C. R. (1999). Nondelegation canons (John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 82). Harvard Law School.
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2019). Chevron as law. Georgetown Law Journal, 107, 1613-1683.
  • Schwarz, F. A., Jr. (2020). How to save the Supreme Court. En Democracy & Justice: Collected Writings (pp. 82-89). Brennan Center for...
  • Walker, J. (2020). The Kavanaugh Court and the Schechter -to- Chevron spectrum: How the new Supreme Court will make the administrative state...
  • West, R. (2009). From choice to reproductive justice: De-constitutionalizing abortion rights. The Yale Law Journal, 118(7), 1394-1432.
  • Wong, A. (2023, 6 de julio). After Supreme Court ruling, race-based scholarship scrutiny. USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2023/07/06/after-supremecourt-affirmative-action-ruling-scholarships-targeted/70388058007/