This book focuses on the Reagan administration's broad attempt from 1980 to 1984 to strike thousands of Social Security disability recipients from government rolls. . . . [Mezey] enriches her study with a brief history of federal disability policy and provides a review of contending arguments over public policy and judicial activism. Of particular interest is the legal battle over the medical criteria used for determining desability and the SSA's deliberate policy of nonacquiescence when confronted with adverse judicial rulings. . . . A well-documented and valuable addition to case studies on the Reagan administration's efforts to cut human services. Choice
This book is a case study of judicial policy making. It focuses on the role of adjudication in the making and refining of federal policy. It goes beyond the scope of most treatments of social security and the disability policy to examine the stages of judicial review and subsequent legislative and bureaucratic responses to adjudication. It then proceeds to analyze the resulting changes in legislative policies. The study is devoted to two themes. First, it provides an opportunity for empirical analysis of the role of the lower federal courts in the policy making arena; second, it examines the role of litigation as a political activity. This issue serves as a timely opportunity to explore the impact of federal courts on bureaucratic and congressional policies by focusing on the interactions of institutions involved in the disability policy-making process. By examining the effects of the courts on social policy, this case study offers new perspectives on the role of the federal courts in the political system.