Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 136 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 28 - Next  Jump:
2003 - American Political Science Association Pages: 39 pages || Words: 11056 words || 
Info
1. Rogers, James. "Why Informed Judges Defer to (Almost) Ignorant Legislators: Accounting for the Puzzle of Judicial Deference" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia Marriott Hotel, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 27, 2003 <Not Available>. 2019-05-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p62046_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: A simple game- and information-theoretic setting is used to explain why judges who are members of an independent judiciary might choose to review ordinary legislation under the highly deferential “rationality” standard of U.S. constitutional law. Current explanations – including the “representational” rationale and the Landes-Posner model – are first surveyed and then rejected as insufficient. The alternative developed here posits the possibility that judicial deference reflects the rational response of judges to information aggregation in plural legislatures over the empirical dimensions of challenged legislation. The analysis explains why a judge might choose to defer to a legislative enactment even though the judge was significantly more informed regarding a law’s outcomes than each of the individual legislators who enacted the law.

2004 - The Law and Society Association Words: 139 words || 
Info
2. Wells, Christina. "Why Deference? Judicial Deference to Government Actions in Times of Crisis" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Renaissance Hotel, Chicago, Illinois, May 27, 2004 <Not Available>. 2019-05-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p117057_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper examines the accepted axiom that courts should defer to government’s actions during war time even when such actions potentially violate citizens’ constitutional rights. The paper questions two assumptions underlying that axiom – first, that executive officials are best equipped to determine when security needs justify liberty infringements and, second, that judges are particularly unqualified to meddle in security issues, even when civil liberties are involved. Relying on both psychological theories regarding the role that fear plays in skewing risk assessment and historical analyses of past crises, the paper argues that times of crisis lend themselves to unnecessary and quite deliberate expansions of executive power at the expense of civil liberties. Thus, the paper argues that such times may actually be the last situation in which judges should defer to executive action infringing civil liberties.

2005 - American Political Science Association Pages: 28 pages || Words: 6806 words || 
Info
3. Clark, Tom. "The Effect of War on Judicial Deference to the Executive Branch: The Courts of Appeals, 1904-2003" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-05-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p41015_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Does a state of war allow presidents to capitalize on their “foreign policy prerogative” in the domestic arena? Do the courts respond to the “wartime president” by becoming more deferential to the executive branch? These questions are examined through an analysis of executive-judicial interactions at the Courts of Appeals. Existing literature demonstrates that judges behave more conservatively with respect to civil liberties during war. There is also evidence to suggest that courts defer to the president more when foreign policy is at issue. This paper asks whether a state of war can blur the lines between the foreign policy and domestic policy functions of the president. The study uses original data from 1490 cases before the Courts of Appeals involving federal executive discretion over a one hundred year time period. Probit analysis demonstrates that judicial deference to the executive in wartime clearly extends to all criminal cases. On the other hand, the statistical evidence suggests that during war, judges do not increase their deference in civil cases. This finding suggests that the distinction between the foreign policy and domestic policy presidencies can be confused during wartime.
Supporting Publications:
Supporting Document

2005 - Southern Political Science Association Pages: 29 pages || Words: 15727 words || 
Info
4. Honda, Eric. "Governing the Future of Post-War Iraq: A Case of Deterring or Deferring the Third Wave of Democracy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Inter-Continental Hotel, New Orleans, LA, Jan 06, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-05-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p67120_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Nearly fifteen months after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority finally handed over power to the Interim Iraqi Government. And while U.S. forces still remain, quite possibly for the foreseeable future, in effect, this political transfer marked the beginnings of a full-return to sovereignty. Yet the question to ask is whether or not this brings with it the beginnings of democracy. To this end, it is rather interesting to note that the transfer of power also corresponds to the 30 anniversary of the start of the Third Wave—thus, it seems quite fitting to discuss Iraq’s future in that context. However, this is a bit premature; not only because both the national elections and the establishment of a permanent constitution have yet to be realized, but also because the entire notion of successful consolidation seemingly challenges the Third Wave itself, over the supposed incompatibility with Arabic/Islamic civilization, the impetus of intervention in place of domestic transplacement, and the presence of ethnopolitical cleavages, only to name a few. For this reason, the future of postwar Iraq presents a highly intriguing case of either deterring or deferring the third wave of democracy—that is, whether the aforementioned challenges display a tendency to work with or against the process of ongoing reform. Although, quite speculative at this point, given that democracy does not happen overnight, the continued prospects for progress and change still opens much debate and discussion on the subject; not only in terms of understanding this question of the Third Wave, but also the more pertinent question of overning the future of postwar Iraq.

2008 - MPSA Annual National Conference Pages: 45 pages || Words: 12637 words || 
Info
5. Javeline, Debra. and Baird, Vanessa. "Democracy through Deference? Judicial Persuasion to Support Rights in Russia" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the MPSA Annual National Conference, Palmer House Hotel, Hilton, Chicago, IL, Apr 03, 2008 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-05-26 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p268095_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Public support for minority rights plays an important role in minorities actually securing and protecting those rights. In countries like Russia where public support for minority rights is low, how can attitudes be changed? Our research shows that institutions such as the Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, and State Duma have the potential to persuade about a quarter of otherwise intolerant Russians to move toward supporting rights. We seek to explain this important shift among this subpopulation. Paradoxically, we find that a usually unpalatable characteristic, deference to authority, among the intolerant is significantly related to their potential to be persuaded to support rights.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 28 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy