The reviewer observed that â€œMillerâ€™s book bridges two fields of scholarship. The first comprises mostly positive, descriptive work on direct democracy by social scientists who generally do not pay sustained attention to the law. Â The second comprises normative work on democracy by legal scholars who focus mostly on interpretation and judicial review.â€
Gilbert noted that the heart of the book analyzes conflicts between ballot initiatives and the judiciary. Â Miller presents original data on post-election challenges to initiatives adopted between 1904 and 2008 in the five â€˜strongestâ€™ initiative states–California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and Arizona. Â This part of the book draws directly from the Miller-Rose Institute Initiative Database. Â According to Gilbert, this â€œrich database, continually updated and available to the public has immense valueâ€ as a resource to social scientists, legal scholars, activists, and policymakers.
The Miller-Rose Institute Initiative Database is available at www.initiatives.theroseinstitute.org.
The review is titled, Michael D. Gilbert, â€œDirect Democracy, Courts, and Majority Will,â€ Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy. September 2010, 9(3): 211-214.