Author's Keywords: Presidential nominations, regime	Convention Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p64769_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Murray, Leah. and Guliuzza, Frank. "Raise or Call: Judicial Nominees as Ideological Legacy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia Marriott Hotel, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 27, 2003 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p64769_index.html>

Murray, L. A. and Guliuzza, F. , 2003-08-27 "Raise or Call: Judicial Nominees as Ideological Legacy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia Marriott Hotel, Philadelphia, PA Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p64769_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: As students of American politics are aware, justices come on to the Supreme Court through a two-step process. Article III of the Constitution requires the President to nominate prospective justices and then the Senate rejects or confirms said nominee. Even though both steps are essential to fill an opening on the Court and one might assume are equally worthy of attention, much of previous scholarship of the politics of judicial selection has concentrated almost exclusively on the Senate’s role in the process. In this paper we suggest it is necessary thus to evaluate the presidential success differently by looking at the ultimate result of his nomination on the Court. If the assumption that presidents want to reproduce themselves ideologically is true, and we believe it is, it is worthwhile to examine whether the president was successful not in just getting his nominee confirmed but in placing an ideological soul mate on the Court. In other words, we ask did the president get what he expected when he nominated prospective Justice X to the Supreme Court. For the most part, excepting a few surprises, we find that there is a correlation between the ideology of the president and his nominees’ decisions on the bench.

Supreme Court Justices’ Ideology and Decision Making in Mental Health Law Cases

Liberal Justices, Conservative Cases? Explaining the Ideological Nature of the Supreme Court's Agenda

The Effects of Case Selection, Judge Ideology, and Institutional Structure in Tort Litigation in State Supreme Courts