Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 1,373 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 275 - Next  Jump:
2017 - APSA Annual Meeting & Exhibition Words: 498 words || 
Info
1. Bowie, Jennifer. and Savchak-Trogdon, Elisha. "State Supreme Court Influence on U.S. Supreme Court Decisions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the APSA Annual Meeting & Exhibition, TBA, San Francisco, CA, Aug 31, 2017 <Not Available>. 2019-07-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1257943_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Scholars have found that the development of law is dependent on several factors, most certainly case facts (i.e. George and Epstein 1992), precedent (i.e. Knight and Epstein 1996), and the ideological preferences of judges (i.e. Segal and Spaeth 2001), and factors such as oral arguments (Johnson 2004) and amicus briefs (Spriggs and Wahlbeck 1997). More recently scholars have examined how other judicial actors influence judicial decision making. Lower court judges, for instance, are in the position of making meaningful contributions to the interpretation of law at higher courts. Certainly among the most important documents that high justices consider when reviewing a case is the lower court opinion. One study shows that U.S. Supreme Court justices use lower federal court opinions to develop their own opinions (Corley, Collins, and Calvin 2011), depending mostly on published opinions from the U.S. Courts of Appeals and those that are written by high-quality judges. Moreover, scholars have examined whether litigant briefs (Corley 2008), amicus briefs (Corley, Collins, Hamner 2014), and lower court dissents (Corley, Collins, and Calvin 2011) influence Court decision making. Similarly, scholars have extended this line of work by examining how intermediate appellate court influence the opinion content in the state supreme court opinions (Savchak and Bowie 2016).

We also argue that like U.S. Courts of Appeals opinions, litigant briefs, and amicus briefs, state supreme court opinions can shape the matter of opinions made by the Court. We add to this increasingly rich literature by examining how state supreme court decisions influence the content of U.S. Supreme Court opinions. We theorize that ideology, case importance, judicial prestige, and case complexity will all influence the degree to which U.S. Supreme Court justices “borrow” language from the state court of last resort opinions, thereby raising the profiles of state supreme court justices and the importance of their work and positions.

In this pilot study of state court influence on U.S. Supreme Court opinion writing, we test several hypotheses about whether U.S. Supreme Court justices borrow language from lower state court opinions. Specifically, our dataset includes all Supreme Court cases that review state supreme court decisions from 1995 to 1998. Our unit of analysis is the state supreme court majority opinion-U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion dyad. The dependent variable is the number of phrases a majority opinion writer takes from the lower court opinion, obtained by analyzing both state court of last resort and U.S. Supreme Court opinions through a plagiarism software program. For each case, we code whether the writer is a chief justice, how many years they have spent on the high court bench, and quality of the lower court opinion writer. Additionally, we account for workload pressures by including variables that capture case complexity, the number of cases reviewed by the high court during the term, and the number of days until the end of the Court’s term. Controls include ideological congruence between the lower and higher court opinion writers and the number of words in the lower court opinion.

2009 - Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference Words: 185 words || 
Info
2. Hume, Robert. "The Supreme Court and Electoral Accountability: Do Voters Hold the President and Congress Accountable for the Supreme Court?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2019-07-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p363742_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Candidates for federal office often claim that elections are important because they influence the Supreme Court. But do voters hold candidates accountable for the behavior of the justices? Are votes for Congress and the President associated with attitudes about the Supreme Court? The analysis is based on original data collected by the author as part of the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. The sample includes a national sample of 1,000 respondents to an internet survey administered by Polimetrix. My questions probe voter attitudes about the Supreme Court, including diffuse support for the institution and whether voters think legal qualifications or political attitudes should influence the nomination process. These measures are then associated with the vote for Congress and the President, after controlling for other potential influences on the vote. I hypothesize that there is no direct correlation between attitudes about the Supreme Court and votes for the President and Congress, even when voters disapprove of the job that the Supreme Court is doing and think politics should influence the selection of justices. The findings have important implications for the democratic accountability of the Supreme Court.

2005 - American Political Science Association Pages: 29 pages || Words: 6378 words || 
Info
3. Schneider, Matthew. "The Influence of Possible U.S. Supreme Court Intervention on the Voting Patterns of State Supreme Courts" 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>. 2019-07-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p41175_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The judicial subfield of American politics has been working for several decades to determine how judges decide cases. However, studying only the United States Supreme Court, because of its static position in the governmental system, limits the ability of researchers to test the standard models of judicial decisionmaking. One way to overcome these limitations is to use the peculiarities of the American legal system to the researcher's benefit. The supreme courts of the various states are supposed to be subservient to the U.S. Supreme Court on issues of federal law, and serve as the highest courts in the land on matters involving state law. This shift in institutional position can be used to test the models of decisionmaking. Using case law from 1995 to 1997 in Illinois, I employed an item-response model to determine ideal points for each state supreme court judge in two conditions: when deciding cases involving the U.S. Constitution, and when deciding cases involving the Illinois state constitution. While there is some evidence of shifting by judges, the results do not eliminate the possibility that either of the major models (strategic and attitudinal) could be at work in these cases.

2004 - Southern Political Science Association Pages: 53 pages || Words: 18443 words || 
Info
4. McLauchlan, Judithanne. "When Congress Speaks, Does the Supreme Court Listen?: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Congressional Amici before the U.S. Supreme Court" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Inter-Continental Hotel, New Orleans, LA, Jan 08, 2004 <Not Available>. 2019-07-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p67786_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 275 - Next  Jump:

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